Roboflow

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Muse Glimmer 30B

GPT-6.1 Sol and Muse Glimmer 30B score 81.7% vs 61.4% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#9 and #40 of 69 models), so GPT-6.1 Sol leads overall.

  • GPT-6.1 Sol wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on object detection (80.8% vs 41.0%).
  • Muse Glimmer 30B is about a fifth of the cost: $0.0013 vs $0.0068 overall average cost per sample.
  • Muse Glimmer 30B is faster: 10.6s vs 12.8s per sample.

Compare GPT-6.1 Sol 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-6.1 Sol
Run to compare this model.
MetaMuse Glimmer 30B
Run to compare this model.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Muse Glimmer 30B on Vision Evals

Score by taskGPT-6.1 SolMuse Glimmer 30B
Object Detection
80.8
41.0
Reasoning
83.7
57.6
OCR
75.8
60.7
Counting
78.8
66.2
Identification
89.6
81.3

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Muse Glimmer 30B Comparison Table

Evals updated November 12, 2026Pricing updated November 13, 2026

PropertyGPT-6.1 SolMuse Glimmer 30B
OrganizationOpenAIMeta
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.1M131K
Parametersundisclosed29.6B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsfree for commercial use
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$0.300
Output $/1M$10.00$1.20
Vision Tasks
Promptable Concept SegmentationDemoNot listed
Both support 10 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
81.7%
61.4%
Avg cost / sample$0.0068$0.0013
Avg speed / sample12.82s10.60s
By task
Object Detection (low)
80.8%
±0.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.7 to 80.9
$0.010
41.0%
$0.0017
Object Detection (high)
81.6%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.1 to 82.0
$0.022
–
Counting (low)
78.8%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 82.4
$0.0037
66.2%
$0.0007
Counting (high)
80.2%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 83.8
$0.0057
–
Identification (low)
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0025
81.3%
$0.0005
Identification (high)
88.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0030
–
OCR (low)
75.8%
$0.0069
60.7%
$0.0013
by category
Single value
58.3%
Transcription
95.7%
Structured JSON
89.5%
Text localization
74.4%
Single value
54.4%
Transcription
82.9%
Structured JSON
80.2%
Text localization
14.8%
OCR (high)
75.8%
$0.016
60.1%
$0.0033
by category
Single value
56.5%
Transcription
96.0%
Structured JSON
90.4%
Text localization
76.7%
Single value
54.4%
Transcription
78.4%
Structured JSON
80.0%
Text localization
13.7%
Reasoning (low)
83.7%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.1 to 84.8
$0.0033
57.6%
$0.0009
Reasoning (high)
88.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.4 to 91.4
$0.0042
62.9%
$0.0026

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Muse Glimmer 30B: Overview

GPT-6.1 Sol

GPT-6.1 Sol is a reasoning model in OpenAI's GPT-6 series that accepts text and image input and returns text. It is an upgrade to GPT-6 Sol positioned to approach the intelligence of the larger GPT-6 Astra model on agentic coding, computer use, and professional knowledge work. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning effort control, ranging from low settings for simple turns to maximum settings for harder tasks, and can be driven with tool use enabled or disabled. It operates over a context window of roughly one million tokens and emits up to 128,000 output tokens in a single response, which supports long-running agent loops over large codebases and multi-document collections. Audio and video inputs are not supported.

OpenAI reports that GPT-6.1 Sol performs on par with or better than GPT-6 Sol across its image input safety evaluations, and that the share of responses containing a factual error at low reasoning effort falls from 11.4 percent to 7.7 percent.

Muse Glimmer 30B

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.