Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs Muse Glimmer 30B

Muse Glimmer 30B leads GPT-4o (2024-08-06) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.5 to 7.7, and Muse Glimmer 30B costs 7.4x less per output token ($1.35 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
26.3
Output $/M
$10.00
0
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.35
1
vs boards won of 1 shared

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
1
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) only
57
Muse Glimmer 30B only
4
Like-for-like categories
1 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
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) not benchmarked, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 9.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Intelligence Index: GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 7.7 against Muse Glimmer 30B 17.5, 9.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) $10.00 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 7.4x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-08-06) takes 128K 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-08-06)BarsMuse Glimmer 30BTies
Intelligence01
All shared boards01
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
Aider polyglot23.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench Lite21.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured49.0Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)31.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
ALE-BenchNot measured962.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
LMArena Text: coding1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1278Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.717.5Muse Glimmer 30B
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured8.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom28.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)64.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)2.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleBench17.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Chess puzzles6.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1264Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: expert1241Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1277Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
AIME14.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)75.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 30.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH level 553.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: math1285Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
MMLU Pro74.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)39.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)71.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MedQA (Vals AI)88.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleQA Verified26.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MMLU84.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: science1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1252Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1275Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1232Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
Design Arena: game devNot measured1132Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse Glimmer 30BLeader
IFBench36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)41.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1274Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision1065Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: English1297Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: non-English1262Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1254Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: German1257Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1234Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1218Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: French1263Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1269Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: Russian1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1279Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1290Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: English1072Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1009Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 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 GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-08-06)Muse 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

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.0075Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.0010Fits in one request

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.155Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.020Fits in one request

Muse Glimmer 30B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.600Exceeds 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 GPT-4o (2024-08-06) and Muse Glimmer 30B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Meta Muse Glimmer 30B
MakerOpenAIMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 6, 2024August 9, 2026
Context window128K131K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.325
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.35
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-08-06) better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or Muse Glimmer 30B?

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 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, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Muse Glimmer 30B, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-08-06) vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-08-06)'s coding index rests on 0 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