The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Glimmer-30B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 35.5.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 35.5, ranking #14 overall.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next wins 5; 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 are already invested in the Meta ecosystem

Choose Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.5 and ranks #14 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 5 of 5 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Muse Glimmer-30B
Meta
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
35.5
#76
50.5
#14
Reasoning
34.7
#77
50.6
#12
Coding
23.8
#65
38.4
#19
Agents
18.5
#62
37.2
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 5
5 of 5
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Muse Glimmer-30B
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Math
28.3#84
33.3#50
Vision
20.4#61
34.6#11
Tool use
18.6#59
32.3#8
Multimodal
23.2#47
35.3#8
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

25 reported for Muse Glimmer-30B · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

5 shared

Muse Glimmer-30B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is better at 5 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, IFBench, SWE-Bench Pro).

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Fri Aug 28 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

95.4B diff

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has 95.4B more parameters than Muse Glimmer-30B, making it 322.3% larger.

Meta
Muse Glimmer-30B
29.6Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
125.0Bparameters
29.6B
Muse Glimmer-30B
125.0B
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Muse Glimmer-30B and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Muse Glimmer-30B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next uses Qwen Community License 1.0.

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 1 month newer than Muse Glimmer-30B.

Muse Glimmer-30B

Aug 10, 2026

2 weeks ago

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

2 days ago

2w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

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

Muse Glimmer-30B

Jan 2026

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

—

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-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

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

FAQ

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

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

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the LLM Stats Score 50.5 to 35.5. Muse Glimmer-30B is made by Meta and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. 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 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next 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-Flash-Next scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

What are the main differences between Muse Glimmer-30B and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (35.5 vs 50.5), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

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

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

Related comparisons