Muse Glimmer-30B vs Sakana Namazu
Sakana Namazu leads the LLM Stats Score 42.1 to 35.0. Muse Glimmer-30B is 3.3x cheaper per token.
Meta · Sakana AI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Sakana Namazu leads the overall LLM Stats Score 42.1 to 35.0, ranking #49 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Sakana Namazu wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Muse Glimmer-30B is roughly 3.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Sakana Namazu also accepts a larger context window (256,000 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
- cost matters — it's about 3.3x cheaper per token
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Choose Sakana Namazu
- overall performance matters — it scores 42.1 and ranks #49 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 256,000 token context window
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
25 reported for Muse Glimmer-30B · 3 for Sakana Namazu
Muse Glimmer-30B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Sakana Namazu is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2026).
Sakana Namazu 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, Muse Glimmer-30B ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.2x cheaper than Sakana Namazu ($0.95/1M tokens).
For output processing, Muse Glimmer-30B ($1.20/1M tokens) is 3.3x cheaper than Sakana Namazu ($4.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Sakana Namazu is more expensive than Muse Glimmer-30B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Sakana Namazu accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to Muse Glimmer-30B's 131,072 tokens. Sakana Namazu can generate longer responses up to 256,000 tokens, while Muse Glimmer-30B is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Muse Glimmer-30B and Sakana Namazu support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Muse Glimmer-30B
Sakana Namazu
License
Usage and distribution terms
Muse Glimmer-30B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Sakana Namazu uses a proprietary license.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Muse Glimmer-30B was released on 2026-08-10, while Sakana Namazu was released on 2026-08-03.
Muse Glimmer-30B is 0 month newer than Sakana Namazu.
Aug 10, 2026
1 months ago
1w newerAug 3, 2026
1 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Muse Glimmer-30B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-04, while Sakana Namazu'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 Sakana Namazu's cutoff date.
Jan 2026
—
Provider Availability
Muse Glimmer-30B is available from DeepInfra. Sakana Namazu is available from Sakana AI.
Muse Glimmer-30B
Sakana Namazu
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Muse Glimmer-30B and Sakana Namazu side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Muse Glimmer-30B vs Sakana Namazu.