Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer-30B
Kimi K3 leads the LLM Stats Score 53.3 to 35.0. Muse Glimmer-30B is 10.9x cheaper per token.
Moonshot AI · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Kimi K3 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 53.3 to 35.0, ranking #9 overall.
In the 7 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Kimi K3 wins 7; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Muse Glimmer-30B is roughly 10.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Kimi K3 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 Kimi K3
- overall performance matters — it scores 53.3 and ranks #9 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 7 of 7 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
Choose Muse Glimmer-30B
- cost matters — it's about 10.9x cheaper per token
- 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
31 reported for Kimi K3 · 25 for Muse Glimmer-30B
Kimi K3 outperforms in 7 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, DeepSearchQA, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, MMMU-Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Muse Glimmer-30B is better at 0 benchmarks.
Kimi K3 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, Kimi K3 ($2.85/1M tokens) is 9.5x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Kimi K3 ($14.25/1M tokens) is 11.9x more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Kimi K3 is more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Kimi K3 has 2770.4B more parameters than Muse Glimmer-30B, making it 9359.5% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Kimi K3 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. Kimi K3 can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Muse Glimmer-30B is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Kimi K3 and Muse Glimmer-30B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Kimi K3
Muse Glimmer-30B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Kimi K3 is licensed under Kimi K3 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.
Kimi K3 License
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Kimi K3 was released on 2026-07-16, while Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10.
Muse Glimmer-30B is 1 month newer than Kimi K3.
Jul 16, 2026
1 months ago
Aug 10, 2026
1 months ago
3w newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while Kimi K3'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 Kimi K3's cutoff date.
—
Jan 2026
Provider Availability
Kimi K3 is available from DeepInfra, Fireworks, Moonshot AI, Novita, Together. Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra.
Kimi K3
Muse Glimmer-30B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Kimi K3 and Muse Glimmer-30B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer-30B.