The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Muse Glimmer-30B

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.7 to 35.0. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is 5.8x cheaper per token.

DeepSeek · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 44.7 to 35.0, ranking #36 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is roughly 5.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

  • overall performance matters — it scores 44.7 and ranks #36 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 5.8x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
44.7
#36
35.0
#90
42.3
#46
34.4
#88
33.0
#37
22.3
#81
31.1
#31
16.6
#78
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.06 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
1,048,576
131,072

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Muse Glimmer-30B
25.8#32
15.8#87
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

9 reported for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B

1 shared

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 0 benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Sep 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 costs less

For input processing, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 ($0.06/1M tokens) is 5.0x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 ($0.18/1M tokens) is 6.7x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Muse Glimmer-30B is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Sep 17 2026 • llm-stats.com
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.20
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

274.4B diff

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 has 274.4B more parameters than Muse Glimmer-30B, making it 927.0% larger.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
304.0Bparameters
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
29.6Bparameters
304.0B
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
29.6B
Muse Glimmer-30B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Muse Glimmer-30B is limited to 131,072 tokens.

DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output1,048,576 tokens
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Thu Sep 17 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Muse Glimmer-30B supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 does not.

Muse Glimmer-30B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is licensed under MIT, while Muse Glimmer-30B uses Apache 2.0.

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

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

MIT

Open weights

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 was released on 2026-07-31, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.

Muse Glimmer-30B is 0 month newer than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Jul 31, 2026

1 months ago

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

1 months ago

1w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731'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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731's cutoff date.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Provider Availability

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Fireworks. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.44/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.32/1M

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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
✓ Preferred
Muse Glimmer-30B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Muse Glimmer-30B.

Which is better, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 or Muse Glimmer-30B?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 leads the LLM Stats Score 44.7 to 35.0. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is made by DeepSeek 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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 compare to Muse Glimmer-30B in benchmarks?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 82.7%, CyberGym: 76.7%, Toolathlon: 70.3%, DSBench-FullStack: 68.7%, DSBench-Hard: 59.6%. 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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is 5.0x cheaper for input tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra. Muse Glimmer-30B costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 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 DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.7 vs 35.0), context window (1.0M vs 131K), input pricing ($0.06 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (MIT vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is developed by DeepSeek and Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta.