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 51.0 to 35.0. Muse Glimmer-30B is 19.0x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Opus 4.8 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 35.0, ranking #15 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.

On price, Muse Glimmer-30B is roughly 19.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Opus 4.8 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

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

Choose Claude Opus 4.8

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 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
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • cost matters — it's about 19.0x cheaper per token
  • 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
51.0
#15
35.0
#88
Reasoning
50.4
#12
34.5
#86
Coding
41.9
#10
22.5
#78
Agents
35.5
#17
16.7
#76
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
9 of 9
0 of 9
Input price
$5.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$25.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
1,000,000
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Opus 4.8
Muse Glimmer-30B
Math
39.2#21
28.5#90
Vision
36.3#8
20.6#66
Tool use
30.5#16
16.1#84
Multimodal
36.2#8
23.9#53
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

27 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.

Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Muse Glimmer-30B costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.8 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 16.7x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.8 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 20.8x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Opus 4.8 is more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Opus 4.8 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. Muse Glimmer-30B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.8 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Thu Sep 10 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

1 months 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

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.8 is available from Anthropic, DeepInfra, Vertex AI. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Opus 4.8

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M
vertex logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

Muse Glimmer-30B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

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 51.0 to 35.0. 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%.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B?

Muse Glimmer-30B is 16.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Muse Glimmer-30B costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via deepinfra.

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 131K 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 (51.0 vs 35.0), context window (1.0M vs 131K), input pricing ($5.00 vs $0.30/M), 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