Gemma 4 26B-A4B vs Muse Glimmer-30B
Muse Glimmer-30B leads the LLM Stats Score 34.9 to 29.6. Gemma 4 26B-A4B is 3.8x cheaper per token.
Google · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Muse Glimmer-30B leads the overall LLM Stats Score 34.9 to 29.6, ranking #93 overall.
In the 4 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Muse Glimmer-30B wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Gemma 4 26B-A4B is roughly 3.8x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Gemma 4 26B-A4B also accepts a larger context window (262,144 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 Gemma 4 26B-A4B
- cost matters — it's about 3.8x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
Choose Muse Glimmer-30B
- overall performance matters — it scores 34.9 and ranks #93 on LLM Stats
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 4 exact shared results
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
12 reported for Gemma 4 26B-A4B · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B
Gemma 4 26B-A4B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 4 benchmarks (AIME 2026, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MMMU-Pro).
Muse Glimmer-30B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemma 4 26B-A4B ($0.07/1M tokens) is 4.3x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemma 4 26B-A4B ($0.34/1M tokens) is 3.5x cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Muse Glimmer-30B is more expensive than Gemma 4 26B-A4B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Muse Glimmer-30B has 4.4B more parameters than Gemma 4 26B-A4B, making it 17.5% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Gemma 4 26B-A4B accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. Gemma 4 26B-A4B can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Muse Glimmer-30B is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Gemma 4 26B-A4B and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Muse Glimmer-30B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemma 4 26B-A4B was released on 2026-04-02, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.
Muse Glimmer-30B is 4 months newer than Gemma 4 26B-A4B.
Apr 2, 2026
5 months ago
Aug 10, 2026
1 months ago
4mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Gemma 4 26B-A4B has a knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, 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 Gemma 4 26B-A4B (2025-01-01).
Jan 2025
Jan 2026
1 yr newerProvider Availability
Gemma 4 26B-A4B is available from DeepInfra, Novita. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.
Gemma 4 26B-A4B
Muse Glimmer-30B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemma 4 26B-A4B and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Gemma 4 26B-A4B vs Muse Glimmer-30B.