Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Muse Glimmer 30B (low) vs Qwen3.7 Plus

The average score is effectively tied at 7.1 vs 7.2. Qwen3.7 Plus has the lower benchmark cost at $0.106 vs $0.186. Qwen3.7 Plus is faster at 12.09s vs 18.51s, with pass rates of 63.6% vs 50.0%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-11

Rank
#99
Total Output Tokens
95,478
Response Time (avg)
18.51s
Total Cost
$0.186
Rank
#96
Total Output Tokens
58,097
Response Time (avg)
12.09s
Total Cost
$0.106
Recommended model Qwen3.7 Plus

It has the best score here (7.2), while costing about 1.7x less than Muse Glimmer 30B (low).

Detailed comparison

Metric Muse Glimmer 30B Muse Glimmer 30B low Release: 2026-08-11 Qwen3.7 Plus Qwen3.7 Plus none Release: 2026-06-03
Score 7.1 7.2
Rank #99 #96
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.2 10.0
Benchmark coverage 22/22 tests · 66/66 attempts 22/22 tests · 66/66 attempts
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 63.6% 50.0%
Flaky tests 5 0
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 1.685 1.014
Total Cost $0.186 $0.106
Input Price $0.350 / 1M $0.320 / 1M
Output Price $1.500 / 1M $1.280 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 130,300 98,824
Output Tokens 33,907 58,097
Reasoning Tokens 61,571 0
Response Time (avg) 18.51s 12.09s
Response Time (max) 234.92s 206.03s
Response Time (total) 407.22s 265.89s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#99 Muse Glimmer 30B

low
Cost
$0.002
Time
13.5s
Tokens
953 tok

#96 Qwen3.7 Plus

none
Cost
$0.019
Time
213.5s
Tokens
11,960 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Muse Glimmer 30B 8.1 9.9 66.7% 0 16.52s 7,419 2,759 10,173
Qwen3.7 Plus 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 2.15s 7,911 639 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair