Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen3.6 27B
Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.6 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 42.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.6 27B in 2 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 27B leads 52.4 to 38.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 44.9% for Muse Glimmer and 37.3% for Qwen3.6 27B.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 42.2 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | 2026-04-22 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.60 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $3.60 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142), Qwen3.6 27B: 39.1 (#163)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 44.9% | 37.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen3.6 27B: 25.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 2.6% | 0.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 22% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| DTBench | — | 78.1% |
| LMCA | — | 34.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 146.5 |
Math Qwen3.6 27B leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen3.6 27B: 48.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 35.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 91.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1417 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 27B leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen3.6 27B: 52.4 (#63)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen3.6 27B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | — |
Writing & Preference Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen3.6 27B: 50.3 (#181)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1026 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen3.6 27B?
Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.6 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 42.2), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen3.6 27B better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.6 27B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 27B has 11.