Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL leads Muse Glimmer 30B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 26.5 to 17.5, and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs 2.7x less per output token ($0.50 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 2 benchmarks have a result for both.

Muse Glimmer 30BMeta
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.35
1
Nemotron 3.5 Super VLNVIDIA
Coding
No data
Overall
35.6
Output $/M
$0.50
1
vs boards won of 2 shared

Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL: which to pick

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

Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
2
Muse Glimmer 30B only
3
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL only
14
Like-for-like categories
2 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
Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 9.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Intelligence Index: Muse Glimmer 30B 17.5 against Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 26.5, 9.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 against Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.50 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
Context window
Muse Glimmer 30B takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 1.05M.

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
CategoryMuse Glimmer 30BBarsNemotron 3.5 Super VLTies
Intelligence01
Web design10
All shared boards11
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured65.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
AA Coding Index49.0Not measuredOnly Muse Glimmer 30B measured
SciCodeNot measured47.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
ALE-Bench962.5Not measuredOnly 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
Intelligence benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
AA Intelligence Index17.526.5Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
AA Agentic Index8.5Not measuredOnly Muse Glimmer 30B measured
LiveBench researchNot measured70.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench browserNot measured4.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured15.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench reasoningNot measured78.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured30.7%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
Neither model has a result on 14 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
Neither model has a result on 20 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1173Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1149Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: game dev11321110Muse Glimmer 30B
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1128Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1154Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
LiveBench designNot measured60.7%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured64.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured69.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 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
Image generation benchmarks for Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BNemotron 3.5 Super VLLeader
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

Muse Glimmer 30B$0.0010Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.0004Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Muse Glimmer 30B$0.020Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.0090Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Muse Glimmer 30B$0.079Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL$0.035Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 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 Muse Glimmer 30B and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
SpecificationMeta Muse Glimmer 30BNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
MakerMetaNVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 9, 2026October 15, 2026
Context window131K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.325$0.15
Output $/Mtok$1.35$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Muse Glimmer 30B better than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Muse Glimmer 30B for work measured by AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL?

Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.325 per million input tokens and $1.35 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs $0.15 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Muse Glimmer 30B or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL?

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL comparison based on?

2 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 Super VL's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next