The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Grok 4.7 vs Muse Glimmer-30B

Grok 4.7 leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 35.0. Muse Glimmer-30B is 5.7x cheaper per token.

xAI · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Grok 4.7 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 35.0, ranking #22 overall.

On price, Muse Glimmer-30B is roughly 5.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Grok 4.7 also accepts a larger context window (500,000 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 Grok 4.7

  • overall performance matters — it scores 48.5 and ranks #22 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 500,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • cost matters — it's about 5.7x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
48.5
#22
35.0
#93
37.4
#68
34.3
#90
40.1
#13
22.3
#84
36.3
#18
16.6
#81
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
Input price
$2.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$6.00 / M
$1.20 / M
Context window
500,000
131,072

Individual benchmarks

23 reported for Grok 4.7 · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B

No common benchmarks found

Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30Bdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

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, Grok 4.7 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 6.7x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Grok 4.7 ($6.00/1M tokens) is 5.0x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Grok 4.7 is more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com
xAI
Grok 4.7
Input tokens$2.00
Output tokens$6.00
Best providerxAI
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

Grok 4.7 accepts 500,000 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. Only Muse Glimmer-30B specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

xAI
Grok 4.7
Input500,000 tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.

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

Grok 4.7

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Grok 4.7 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.

Grok 4.7

Proprietary

Closed source

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Grok 4.7 was released on 2026-09-21, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.

Grok 4.7 is 1 month newer than Muse Glimmer-30B.

Grok 4.7

Sep 21, 2026

0 days ago

1mo newer
Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Grok 4.7 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-05-01, while Muse Glimmer-30B has a cutoff of 2026-01-04.

Grok 4.7 has more recent training data (up to 2026-05-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to Muse Glimmer-30B (2026-01-04).

Grok 4.7

May 2026

4 mo newer
Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Provider Availability

Grok 4.7 is available from xAI. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.

Grok 4.7

xai logo
xAI
Input Price:Input: $2.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $6.00/1M

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 Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Grok 4.7
✓ Preferred
Muse Glimmer-30B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Grok 4.7 vs Muse Glimmer-30B.

Which is better, Grok 4.7 or Muse Glimmer-30B?

Grok 4.7 leads the LLM Stats Score 48.5 to 35.0. Grok 4.7 is made by xAI 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 Grok 4.7 compare to Muse Glimmer-30B in benchmarks?

Grok 4.7 scores BixBench MCQ: 88.4%, WMDP-Bio: 88.1%, WMDP-Cyber: 88.1%, WMDP-Chem: 84.9%, CyberGym: 80.3%. 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 Grok 4.7 cheaper than Muse Glimmer-30B?

Muse Glimmer-30B is 6.7x cheaper for input tokens. Grok 4.7 costs $2.00/M input and $6.00/M output via xai. Muse Glimmer-30B costs $0.30/M input and $1.20/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Grok 4.7 supports 500K 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 Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (48.5 vs 35.0), context window (500K vs 131K), input pricing ($2.00 vs $0.30/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Grok 4.7 and Muse Glimmer-30B?

Grok 4.7 is developed by xAI and Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta.