Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen2.5 Plus 1127
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Muse Glimmer leads 50.5 to 41.9.
- Muse Glimmer has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 38.8 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 14 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 38.5 (#175)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1314 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| SciCode | 44.9% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 25.9 (#141)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1299 |
| CritPt | 2.6% | — |
Math Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 36.1 (#174)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1298 |
Knowledge Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 35.5 (#183)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1289 |
Multilingual Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 41.9 (#201)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1265 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1314 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1271 |
| LMArena German | — | 1231 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1207 |
Instruction Following Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 67.2 (#199)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1275 |
Long Context Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 39.2 (#184)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1292 |
Writing & Preference Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen2.5 Plus 1127: 49.4 (#192)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1299 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1262 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1299 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen2.5 Plus 1127?
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 Plus 1127 has 14.