The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Glimmer-30B vs Parse

Comparing Muse Glimmer-30B and Parse across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Meta · Cohere · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Glimmer-30B and Parse trade strengths across price, capabilities, and technical limits. The better choice depends on the workload.

Muse Glimmer-30B also accepts a larger context window (131,072 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 Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 131,072 token context window
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Parse

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Benchmark wins
Input price
$0.30 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.20 / M
— / M
Context window
131,072
8,192

Individual benchmarks

25 reported for Muse Glimmer-30B · 1 for Parse

No common benchmarks found

Muse Glimmer-30B and Parsedon'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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

27.3B diff

Muse Glimmer-30B has 27.3B more parameters than Parse, making it 1187.0% larger.

Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
29.6Bparameters
Cohere
Parse
2.3Bparameters
29.6B
Muse Glimmer-30B
2.3B
Parse

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Glimmer-30B accepts 131,072 input tokens compared to Parse's 8,192 tokens. Only Muse Glimmer-30B specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Cohere
Parse
Input8,192 tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Muse Glimmer-30B and Parse support multimodal inputs.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Parse

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Muse Glimmer-30B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Parse 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

Parse

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10, while Parse was released on 2026-08-27.

Parse is 1 month newer than Muse Glimmer-30B.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

1 months ago

Parse

Aug 27, 2026

3 weeks ago

2w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Parse

Provider Availability

Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra. Parse is available from Azure, Cohere.

Muse Glimmer-30B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

Parse

azure logo
Azure
cohere logo
Cohere
* 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 Muse Glimmer-30B and Parse side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Glimmer-30B
✓ Preferred
Parse
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Glimmer-30B vs Parse.

Which is better, Muse Glimmer-30B or Parse?

Muse Glimmer-30B (Meta) and Parse (Cohere) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Muse Glimmer-30B compare to Parse 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%. Parse scores ParseBench: 79.2%.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B supports 131K tokens and Parse supports 8K 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 Parse?

Key differences include context window (131K vs 8K), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Muse Glimmer-30B and Parse?

Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta and Parse is developed by Cohere.