Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen3.6 35B-A3B
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads 51.3 to 38.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 44.9% for Muse Glimmer and 35.8% for Qwen3.6 35B-A3B.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 37.6 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.49 |
| 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), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 37.2 (#196)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 44.9% | 35.8% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| WeirdML | — | 34.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 22.1 (#134)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 23% |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 28.0 (#109)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 2.6% | 0.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 41.6% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 26% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 22% |
| DTBench | — | 73.9% |
| LMCA | — | 29.7% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 44.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.93 |
Math Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 38.9 (#121)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 20.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 86.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1417 | — |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 35B-A3B leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: 51.3 (#68)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 84.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen3.6 35B-A3B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.6 35B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen3.6 35B-A3B?
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen3.6 35B-A3B better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 37.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 35B-A3B has 14.