Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Claude Opus 4.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#39); Muse Glimmer 30B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Glimmer 30B in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper at $0.35 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
- Claude Opus 4.5 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Muse Glimmer 30B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 50.5 | 55.2 |
| Released | 2025-11-01 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 131K |
| Max output | 64K | 118K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | $0.35 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | $1.50 |
| Results tracked | 69 | 1 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 55.4 (#21), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 76.7% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 76.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1493 | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 70.7% | — |
| GSO | 26.5% | — |
| WeirdML | 63.7% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,025 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.77 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 47.2 (#11), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 63.1% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 77.5% | — |
| GDPval | 45.5% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 3.8% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 84% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 24.7% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 79.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 92.3% | — |
| Cybench | 82% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.8% | — |
| OSWorld | 66.3% | — |
| BALROG | 43.5% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1180 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 75% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 4,967 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 42.5 (#43), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 37.6% | — |
| SimpleBench | 62% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.2% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 52.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 80% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 12% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 11.9% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1476 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 22% | — |
| DTBench | 89.9% | — |
| LMCA | 44.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.1 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
Math Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 38.5 (#85), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 34.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 4.9% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 86.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 36% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 20.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 56.4 (#38), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.2% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 45.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1488 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 31.1 (#99), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| GeoBench | 75% | — |
| VPCT | 40% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 28.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1462 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 54.5 (#45), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1470 | — |
| LMArena French | 1471 | — |
| LMArena German | 1449 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1424 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1455 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 77.7 (#20), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1478 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.5: 46.4 (#21), Muse Glimmer 30B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 21.1% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1480 | — |
Writing & Preference Muse Glimmer 30B leads
Claude Opus 4.5: 68.2 (#28), Muse Glimmer 30B: 69.9
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1687 | 1798 |
| LMArena Text | 1451 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1445 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1466 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than Muse Glimmer 30B?
Claude Opus 4.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#39); Muse Glimmer 30B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper. It lists at $0.35 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Opus 4.5 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and Muse Glimmer 30B share?
1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Muse Glimmer 30B has 1.