Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs Muse Glimmer 30B

GLM 4.6 leads Muse Glimmer 30B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 18.5 to 17.5, and Muse Glimmer 30B costs 1.6x less per output token ($1.35 vs $2.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
8.8
Overall
33.4
Output $/M
$2.20
2
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.35
2
vs boards won of 4 shared

GLM 4.6 or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($1.35 vs $2.20 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Shared results
4
GLM 4.6 only
65
Muse Glimmer 30B only
1
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GLM 4.6 8.8 from 2 benchmarks, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 12.0 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GLM 4.6 340.8 against Muse Glimmer 30B 962.5, 20.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 1.6x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, Muse Glimmer 30B 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGLM 4.6BarsMuse Glimmer 30BTies
Coding02
Intelligence10
Web design10
All shared boards22
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev1341Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Coding Index45.849.0Muse Glimmer 30B
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.1%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
ALE-Bench340.8962.5Muse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Text: coding1449Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1350Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Intelligence Index18.517.5GLM 4.6
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured8.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1029Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)72.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
BrowseComp-Plus48.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: expert1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1445Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark45.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: math1432Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
MMLU Pro82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)56.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: science1456Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1455Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1448Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1416Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
Design Arena: websites1174Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: UI components1145Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: game dev11501144GLM 4.6
Design Arena: data viz1161Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: 3D1128Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1165Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: SVG1108Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
IFBench43.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text1440Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1410Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1412Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: English1449Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1426Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1499Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: German1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1393Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: French1459Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1436Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1418Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1427Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1422Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1415Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1409Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.0017Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.0010Fits in one request

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.037Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.020Fits in one request

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.142Exceeds the context window
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.079Exceeds the context window

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GLM 4.6 and Muse Glimmer 30B
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6Meta Muse Glimmer 30B
MakerZ.aiMeta
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025August 9, 2026
Context window205K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.60$0.325
Output $/Mtok$2.20$1.35
Coding index8.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?

Only GLM 4.6 has a coding score, 8.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for output tokens 1.6x cheaper ($1.35 vs $2.20 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or ALE-Bench, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or Muse Glimmer 30B?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.60 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.325 and $1.35. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or Muse Glimmer 30B?

GLM 4.6, with 205K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Muse Glimmer 30B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next