Model comparison

Muse Glimmer vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Muse Glimmer Meta

41.3

Rank #128 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

45.0

Rank #66 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 54.9 to 37.9.
  • Muse Glimmer has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.7 Plus specifications
Muse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index41.345.0
Released—2026-06-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.40
Output $ / M tokens—$1.60
Results tracked1332

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Muse Glimmer leads

Muse Glimmer: 38.7 (#157), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.1 (#200)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Coding14171473
FrontierCode—10.2%
LMArena WebDev1355—
SciCode—45.5%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.2 (#130)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
OSWorld 2.0—2.8%

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 27.2 (#111), Qwen3.7 Plus: 38.4 (#54)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Hard Prompts13951460
NYT Connections (extended)—74.8%
CritPt—9.1%
Chess Puzzles—24%
Mystery Game Puzzles—17%
DTBench—84%
LMCA—37.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index—147.39

Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 36.1 (#128), Qwen3.7 Plus: 49.3 (#47)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Math14191467
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—34.4%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—93.3%

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 37.9 (#140), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#46)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Expert13881467
GPQA Diamond—87.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.2 (#30)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Vision—1281
LMArena Document—1444

Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 50.6 (#117), Qwen3.7 Plus: 55.0 (#36)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Non-English13841445
LMArena Chinese14121510
LMArena Russian13931457
LMArena French—1471
LMArena German—1471
LMArena Japanese—1411
LMArena Korean—1416
LMArena Spanish—1453

Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 72.7 (#134), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.9 (#49)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following13741439

Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#124), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#61)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Longer Query13811454

Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads

Muse Glimmer: 57.7 (#122), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.5 (#54)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse GlimmerQwen3.7 Plus
LMArena Text13891454
LMArena Creative Writing13381439
LMArena Multi-Turn13981459

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?

Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 36.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.7 Plus share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 13 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper