The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Muse Glimmer-30B

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B are closely matched at 32.1 and 34.9 on the LLM Stats Score. Muse Glimmer-30B is 11.4x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 32.1 and 34.9.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Muse Glimmer-30B wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Muse Glimmer-30B is roughly 11.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 also accepts a larger context window (200,000 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 Sonnet 4.5

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 200,000 token context window

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 11.4x 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 Sonnet 4.5
Anthropic
Muse Glimmer-30B
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
32.1
#110
34.9
#93
Reasoning
31.3
#111
34.3
#91
Coding
21.5
#90
22.3
#84
Agents
17.2
#77
16.5
#81
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 1
1 of 1
Input price
$3.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
200,000
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Muse Glimmer-30B
Math
25.0#115
28.4#92
Vision
10.7#119
20.5#70
Tool use
26.1#25
13.8#97
Multimodal
12.6#107
23.9#57
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

9 reported for Claude Sonnet 4.5 · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B

1 shared

Claude Sonnet 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Muse Glimmer-30B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Sep 22 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 Sonnet 4.5 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Sonnet 4.5 is more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Input tokens$3.00
Output tokens$15.00
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 Sonnet 4.5 accepts 200,000 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 Sonnet 4.5 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Tue Sep 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Sonnet 4.5 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 Sonnet 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Sonnet 4.5 was released on 2025-09-29, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.

Muse Glimmer-30B is 11 months newer than Claude Sonnet 4.5.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Sep 29, 2025

11 months ago

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

1 months ago

10mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Sonnet 4.5 has a knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-31, while Muse Glimmer-30B has a cutoff of 2026-01-04.

Muse Glimmer-30B has more recent training data (up to 2026-01-04), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Claude Sonnet 4.5 (2025-01-31).

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Jan 2025

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

1 yr newer

Provider Availability

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is available from Anthropic. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

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 Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Sonnet 4.5
✓ Preferred
Muse Glimmer-30B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Muse Glimmer-30B.

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 32.1 and 34.9. Claude Sonnet 4.5 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 Sonnet 4.5 compare to Muse Glimmer-30B in benchmarks?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 scores MMMLU: 89.1%, AIME 2025: 87.0%, TAU-bench Retail: 86.2%, GPQA: 83.4%, MMMUval: 77.8%. 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 Sonnet 4.5 cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B?

Muse Glimmer-30B is 10.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Sonnet 4.5 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/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 Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 supports 200K 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 Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (32.1 vs 34.9), context window (200K vs 131K), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.30/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is developed by Anthropic and Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons