Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro and Muse Glimmer 30B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.
Compare Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B on Vision Evals
Gemini 3.1 Pro scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Gemini 3.1 Pro leads 67.4% to 41.0%.
Overall, Gemini 3.1 Pro averages 76.8% (#13 of 63) against 61.4% (#34 of 63) for Muse Glimmer 30B.
Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper ($0.0013 vs $0.010 per sample), while Gemini 3.1 Pro is faster (8.4s vs 10.6s per sample).
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 17, 2026
| Property | Gemini 3.1 Pro | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Meta | |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Feb 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 131K |
| Parameters | Unknown | 29.6B |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | free for commercial use |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $0.300 |
| Output $/1M | $12.00 | $1.20 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 76.8% | 61.4% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.010 | $0.0013 |
| Avg speed / sample | 8.44s | 10.60s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 67.4% | 41.0% |
| Counting | 71.6% | 66.2% |
| Identification | 100.0% | 81.3% |
| OCR (low) | 72.6% | 60.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 73.1% | 60.1% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 72.2% | 57.6% |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.8% | 62.9% |
Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B: Overview
Gemini 3.1 Pro is a proprietary multimodal model from Google’s Gemini 3 series, released in early 2026 and designed for advanced reasoning across large multimodal datasets. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and documents, supporting up to a 1-million-token input context with up to 64k output tokens. Compared with Gemini 3 Pro, it improves long-context synthesis and multi-step reasoning, enabling more reliable analysis of large documents, datasets, and software codebases.
The model also advances visual understanding and grounding, allowing it to interpret UI screenshots, diagrams, and real-world scenes while referencing specific regions within images or video. These capabilities make Gemini 3.1 Pro well suited for multimodal workflows involving document processing, interface analysis, robotics research, and complex visual reasoning.
Muse Glimmer 30B is a dense vision language model from Meta built for long-horizon agentic work on local hardware. The architecture pairs a 52-layer causal text decoder with a roughly 1.8B parameter ViT-G/14 perception encoder for about 29.6 billion parameters in total, and it accepts interleaved text and image input so an agent can interpret screenshots, charts, and documents alongside conversation. The decoder uses grouped-query attention with 32 query heads and 2 key-value heads, a repeating pattern of three sliding-window local attention layers followed by one global layer, SwiGLU feed-forward blocks, and rotary position embeddings applied on the local layers, supporting a trained context of 131,072 tokens.
Meta describes the model as distilled from the larger Muse Spark and trained and evaluated around agentic behavior: end-to-end task completion, schema-accurate tool calling, multi-step reasoning across extended workflows, and recovery when a tool call returns an unexpected result. Reasoning effort is selectable across low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, and the model emits channel-scoped reasoning traces together with XML style tool calls rather than JSON, which requires parsers specific to this family. A companion block-diffusion drafter head predicts blocks of 16 tokens per forward pass for speculative decoding, with the main model verifying the proposals in parallel.