Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen2-72B
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.0 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 8 categories and Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Glimmer leads 38.5 to 21.2.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | 2024-06-07 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 15 | 26 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142), Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1196 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| SciCode | 44.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |
Reasoning Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1191 |
| CritPt | 2.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.28 |
Math Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |
Knowledge Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |
Multilingual Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1240 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1169 |
| LMArena French | — | 1170 |
| LMArena German | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1169 |
Instruction Following Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1181 |
Long Context Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1192 |
Writing & Preference Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1196 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen2-72B?
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen2-72B better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen2-72B share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.