Granite 4.0 Micro vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads Granite 4.0 Micro on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.5 to 5.1, and Granite 4.0 Micro costs 12.1x less per output token ($0.112 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
Granite 4.0 Micro or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Granite 4.0 Micro for output tokens 12.1x cheaper ($0.112 vs $1.35 per million) and work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 1
- Granite 4.0 Micro only
- 12
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads, 17.5 against 5.1.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Muse Glimmer 30B has a AA Agentic Index result, 8.5.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B takes 131K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Granite 4.0 Micro
Granite 4.0 Micro $0.0001, Muse Glimmer 30B $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Granite 4.0 Micro not benchmarked, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 12.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Intelligence Index: Granite 4.0 Micro 5.1 against Muse Glimmer 30B 17.5, 12.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Granite 4.0 Micro $0.112 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 12.1x apart.
- Context window
- Granite 4.0 Micro takes 131K 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.
| Category | Granite 4.0 Micro | Bars | Muse Glimmer 30B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 1 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 49.0 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 18.0% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 1.5% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 962.5 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 5.1 | 17.5 | Muse 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
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 8.5 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 12.6% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 33.6% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 5.0% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 28.3% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 6.0 | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.0% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 2.8% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 44.7% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1132 | Only 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 index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 24.8% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Granite 4.0 Micro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 46 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Granite 4.0 Micro costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Granite 4.0 Micro costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Granite 4.0 Micro 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.
| Specification | IBM Granite 4.0 Micro | Meta Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | IBM Granite | Meta |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | October 20, 2025 | August 9, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.017 | $0.325 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.112 | $1.35 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Granite 4.0 Micro better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Granite 4.0 Micro for output tokens 12.1x cheaper ($0.112 vs $1.35 per million) and work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Granite 4.0 Micro or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Granite 4.0 Micro costs $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.112 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, Granite 4.0 Micro or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Muse Glimmer 30B, with 131K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Granite 4.0 Micro vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?
1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Granite 4.0 Micro'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.