Ling 3.0 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Ling 3.0 Flash leads Muse Glimmer 30B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.1 to 17.5, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 11.1x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.0 Flash or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
- Shared results
- 3
- Ling 3.0 Flash only
- 21
- Muse Glimmer 30B only
- 2
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 20.1 against 17.5.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 19.3 against 8.5.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 84.8%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 82.0%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001, Muse Glimmer 30B $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has the number, $0.05.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 10.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Agentic Index: Ling 3.0 Flash 19.3 against Muse Glimmer 30B 8.5, 10.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 11.1x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.0 Flash takes 262K 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Bars | Muse Glimmer 30B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 50.6 | 49.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 84.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 65.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 2.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 50.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | 27.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SciCode | 42.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 962.5 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.1 | 17.5 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 19.3 | 8.5 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 30.3% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 25.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 14 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 79.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 61.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 70.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 32.3% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | 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 index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 50.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 80.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 73.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 45 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | 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
Ling 3.0 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash 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 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash | Meta Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Meta |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 23, 2026 | August 9, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.0405 | $0.325 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.1215 | $1.35 |
| Coding index | 29.6 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.05 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.0 Flash better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 per million input tokens and $0.1215 per million output tokens; Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.325 and $1.35. Cost per solved task is known for Ling 3.0 Flash only.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Ling 3.0 Flash, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.0 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?
3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Ling 3.0 Flash'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.