# Muse Glimmer vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/muse-glimmer-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Glimmer leads 38.5 to 13.5.

## Snapshot

| | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 30.5 |
| Rank | 131 | 293 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.7 (#282)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1155 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| SciCode | 44.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |

## Reasoning

- Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 21.8 (#212)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1130 |
| CritPt | 2.6% | — |

## Math

- Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 33.0 (#207)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1155 |

## Knowledge

- Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#296)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1126 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1177 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1073 |
| LMArena French | — | 1101 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1008 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 57.7 (#265)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#246)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.2 (#271)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1140 |

## FAQ

### Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 31.7 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen1.5-32B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.