The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Glimmer-30B vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 35.5.

Meta · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 35.5, ranking #12 overall.

In the 6 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Muse Spark 1.1 wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Muse Spark 1.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #12 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 6 exact shared results

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Muse Glimmer-30B
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
35.5
#76
51.0
#12
Reasoning
34.7
#77
51.5
#9
Coding
23.8
#65
37.3
#23
Agents
18.5
#62
37.0
#13
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 6
6 of 6
Input price
— / M
$1.25 / M
Output price
— / M
$4.25 / M
Context window
—
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Muse Glimmer-30B
Muse Spark 1.1
Vision
20.4#61
35.9#9
Tool use
18.6#59
32.7#7
Multimodal
23.2#47
33.9#11
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

25 reported for Muse Glimmer-30B · 11 for Muse Spark 1.1

6 shared

Muse Glimmer-30B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Muse Spark 1.1 is better at 6 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, OSWorld-Verified, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1).

Muse Spark 1.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Muse Spark 1.1 specifies input context (1,048,576 tokens). Only Muse Spark 1.1 specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Muse Glimmer-30B and Muse Spark 1.1 support multimodal inputs.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Spark 1.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Muse Glimmer-30B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Muse Spark 1.1 uses a proprietary license.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Muse Spark 1.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10, while Muse Spark 1.1 was released on 2026-07-09.

Muse Glimmer-30B is 1 month newer than Muse Spark 1.1.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

2 weeks ago

1mo newer
Muse Spark 1.1

Jul 9, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while Muse Spark 1.1'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 Muse Spark 1.1's cutoff date.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Muse Spark 1.1

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Muse Glimmer-30B and Muse Spark 1.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Glimmer-30B
✓ Preferred
Muse Spark 1.1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Glimmer-30B vs Muse Spark 1.1.

Which is better, Muse Glimmer-30B or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 35.5. Muse Glimmer-30B is made by Meta and Muse Spark 1.1 is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Muse Glimmer-30B compare to Muse Spark 1.1 in benchmarks?

Muse Glimmer-30B scores AIME 2026: 94.7%, Siren AgentDojo Utility: 94.2%, GPQA: 83.5%, AA-LCR: 80.0%, CharXiv-R: 78.8%. Muse Spark 1.1 scores CharXiv-R: 88.4%, MCP Atlas: 88.1%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 80.0%, BabyVision: 76.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Muse Glimmer-30B and Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Glimmer-30B supports an unknown number of tokens and Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Muse Glimmer-30B and Muse Spark 1.1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (35.5 vs 51.0), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons