The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Glimmer-30B vs Qwen3.8-27B

Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Glimmer-30B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 8 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, IFBench, OmniDocBench 1.5, OSWorld-Verified, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1). Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Based on current benchmark, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Muse Glimmer-30B

  • you are already invested in the Meta ecosystem

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 8 of 8 shared benchmarks
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Benchmark wins
0 of 8
8 of 8
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
Released
Aug 2026
Aug 2026
License
Apache 2.0
Apache 2.0

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

8 benchmarks

Muse Glimmer-30B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 8 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, IFBench, OmniDocBench 1.5, OSWorld-Verified, SWE-Bench Pro, Terminal-Bench 2.1).

Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Aug 25 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Playground indexes and blind preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

1.8B diff

Muse Glimmer-30B has 1.8B more parameters than Qwen3.8-27B, making it 6.5% larger.

Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
29.6Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
27.8Bparameters
29.6B
Muse Glimmer-30B
27.8B
Qwen3.8-27B

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Muse Glimmer-30B and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Qwen3.8-27B is 0 month newer than Muse Glimmer-30B.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

2 weeks ago

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

1 weeks ago

4d newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while Qwen3.8-27B'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 Qwen3.8-27B's cutoff date.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Qwen3.8-27B

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Muse Glimmer-30B and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Glimmer-30B
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Glimmer-30B vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Muse Glimmer-30B or Qwen3.8-27B?

Qwen3.8-27B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Muse Glimmer-30B is made by Meta and Qwen3.8-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Muse Glimmer-30B compare to Qwen3.8-27B 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%. Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%.

Who makes Muse Glimmer-30B and Qwen3.8-27B?

Muse Glimmer-30B is developed by Meta and Qwen3.8-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.