Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 5.3 FlashX vs Muse Glimmer 30B

GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B cost about the same per output token ($1.25 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Replace GLM 5.3 FlashX Replace Muse Glimmer 30B
GLM 5.3 FlashXZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.25
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.35
vs $1.25 vs $1.35 per 1M output tokens. GLM 5.3 FlashX is 1.1x cheaper.

GLM 5.3 FlashX or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GLM 5.3 FlashX for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($1.25 vs $1.35 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).

Model AGLM 5.3 FlashXZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMuse Glimmer 30BMetaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 5.3 FlashX has none yet; Muse Glimmer 30B on AA Coding Index, ALE-Bench and AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead.

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 5.3 FlashX not benchmarked, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GLM 5.3 FlashX $1.25 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 5.3 FlashX takes 1.05M tokens, Muse Glimmer 30B 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index2 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashXMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured49.0Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured962.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashXMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured17.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashXMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured8.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Web design benchmarks for GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGLM 5.3 FlashXMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
Design Arena: game devNot measured1144Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 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 5.3 FlashX$0.0010Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.0010Fits in one request

GLM 5.3 FlashX costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 5.3 FlashX$0.022Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.020Fits in one request

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 5.3 FlashX$0.086Fits in one request
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 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 5.3 FlashXMeta Muse Glimmer 30B
MakerZ.aiMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 18, 2026August 9, 2026
Context window1.05M131K
Input $/Mtok$0.37$0.325
Output $/Mtok$1.25$1.35
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 5.3 FlashX better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GLM 5.3 FlashX for output tokens 1.1x cheaper ($1.25 vs $1.35 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GLM 5.3 FlashX or Muse Glimmer 30B?

GLM 5.3 FlashX costs $0.37 per million input tokens and $1.25 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 5.3 FlashX or Muse Glimmer 30B?

GLM 5.3 FlashX, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

Has any benchmark tested both GLM 5.3 FlashX and Muse Glimmer 30B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GLM 5.3 FlashX has none yet; Muse Glimmer 30B on AA Coding Index, ALE-Bench and AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next