Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Max in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.7 Max leads 62.4 to 38.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is CritPt: 2.6% for Muse Glimmer and 13.4% for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Muse Glimmer has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 51.5 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142), Qwen3.7 Max: 50.4 (#45)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | 1515 |
| SciCode | 44.9% | 48.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1498 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,189 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 22.1 (#135)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen3.7 Max: 49.2 (#38)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 2.6% | 13.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1483 |
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.68 |
Math Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen3.7 Max: 62.4 (#32)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1490 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen3.7 Max: 61.6 (#28)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1488 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen3.7 Max: 56.9 (#15)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1474 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1530 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1484 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen3.7 Max: 76.7 (#38)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1460 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#40)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1482 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Max leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen3.7 Max: 65.0 (#54)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1449 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 51.5 to 41.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen3.7 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.4 versus 40.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.7 Max share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.