# Muse Glimmer vs Qwen2-72B

> Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/muse-glimmer-vs-qwen2-72b
- 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 Qwen2-72B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Glimmer leads 38.5 to 21.2.

## Snapshot

| | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 30.0 |
| Rank | 131 | 300 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142)
- Qwen2-72B: 29.1 (#310)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1196 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | — |
| SciCode | 44.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Muse Glimmer: —
- Qwen2-72B: 17.0 (#146)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |

## Reasoning

- Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144)
- Qwen2-72B: 23.2 (#181)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1191 |
| CritPt | 2.6% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.28 |

## Math

- Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125)
- Qwen2-72B: 30.2 (#236)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |

## Knowledge

- Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143)
- Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#275)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |

## Multilingual

- Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122)
- Qwen2-72B: 35.9 (#244)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1240 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1169 |
| LMArena French | — | 1170 |
| LMArena German | — | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1169 |

## Instruction Following

- Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135)
- Qwen2-72B: 61.7 (#241)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1181 |

## Long Context

- Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#235)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1192 |

## Writing & Preference

- Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126)
- Qwen2-72B: 40.8 (#241)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1196 |

## FAQ

### Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen2-72B?

Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen2-72B share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.