Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Muse Glimmer 30B leads Nemotron 3.5 Lightning on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.5 to 12.9, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 9.2x less per output token ($0.147 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: which to pick
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for work measured by AA Coding Index or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 4
- Muse Glimmer 30B only
- 1
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
- 16
- 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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads, 17.5 against 12.9.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads, 8.5 against 3.5.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Muse Glimmer 30B $0.0010, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has the number, $0.06.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 14.3 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- AA Coding Index: Muse Glimmer 30B 49.0 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 26.8, 22.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 per million output tokens, 9.2x apart.
- Context window
- Muse Glimmer 30B takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 262K.
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 | Muse Glimmer 30B | Bars | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 4 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 49.0 | 26.8 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 52.8% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 3.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 10.9% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 29.5% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 32.1% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| ALE-Bench | 962.5 | 769.2 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 17.5 | 12.9 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| 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 | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 8.5 | 3.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 18.5% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.6% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.9% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 17.0% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 74.3% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 10.6% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 54.2% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: game dev | 1144 | Not measured | 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 | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 4.3% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 60.3% | Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | 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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 | Meta Muse Glimmer 30B | NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Meta | NVIDIA |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | August 9, 2026 | August 11, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.325 | $0.0534 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.35 | $0.147 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 22.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.06 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Muse Glimmer 30B better than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning for coding?
Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Muse Glimmer 30B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for work measured by AA Coding Index or ALE-Bench, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?
Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.325 per million input tokens and $1.35 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 and $0.147. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.
Which has the bigger context window, Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Muse Glimmer 30B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.