The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Glimmer-30B

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.7 to 35.5.

Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.7 to 35.5, ranking #10 overall.

In the 9 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Opus 4.8 wins 9; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Opus 4.8

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.7 and ranks #10 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 9 of 9 exact shared results

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic
Muse Glimmer-30B
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.7
#10
35.5
#76
Reasoning
51.2
#10
34.7
#77
Coding
43.8
#8
23.8
#65
Agents
36.8
#14
18.5
#62
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
9 of 9
0 of 9
Input price
$5.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.8
Muse Glimmer-30B
Math
39.5#18
28.3#84
Vision
37.2#6
20.4#61
Tool use
31.1#11
18.6#59
Multimodal
36.4#7
23.2#47
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

26 reported for Claude Opus 4.8 · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B

9 shared

Claude Opus 4.8 outperforms in 9 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, DeepSearchQA, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, OSWorld-Verified, ScreenSpot Pro, SWE-Bench Pro, SWE-Bench Verified), while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Opus 4.8 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Opus 4.8

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Opus 4.8 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Muse Glimmer-30B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Claude Opus 4.8

Proprietary

Closed source

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.8 was released on 2026-05-28, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.

Muse Glimmer-30B is 2 months newer than Claude Opus 4.8.

Claude Opus 4.8

May 28, 2026

3 months ago

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

2 weeks ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while Claude Opus 4.8's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Muse Glimmer-30B's training data extends to 2026-01-04, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Opus 4.8's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 4.8

—

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Opus 4.8
✓ Preferred
Muse Glimmer-30B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Glimmer-30B.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.7 to 35.5. Claude Opus 4.8 is made by Anthropic and Muse Glimmer-30B is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Opus 4.8 compare to Muse Glimmer-30B in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores GPQA: 93.6%, DeepSearchQA: 93.1%, CharXiv-R: 89.9%, SWE-Bench Verified: 88.6%, ScreenSpot Pro: 87.9%. Muse Glimmer-30B scores AIME 2026: 94.7%, Siren AgentDojo Utility: 94.2%, GPQA: 83.5%, AA-LCR: 80.0%, CharXiv-R: 78.8%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Opus 4.8 supports 1.0M tokens and Muse Glimmer-30B supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.7 vs 35.5), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Opus 4.8 is developed by Anthropic and Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons