Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Compare Kimi K3 and Muse Glimmer 30B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, Image Captioning, OCR, and Classification.
Compare Kimi K3 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
Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B on Vision Evals
Muse Glimmer 30B scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Counting, where Muse Glimmer 30B leads 66.2% to 46.0%.
Overall, Kimi K3 averages 66.5% (#19 of 28) against 70.8% (#14 of 28) for Muse Glimmer 30B.
Muse Glimmer 30B is both cheaper ($0.0013 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (8.7s vs 12.7s per sample).
Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B Comparison Table
Evals updated August 12, 2026Pricing updated August 13, 2026
| Property | Kimi K3 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Moonshot AI | Meta |
| Category | open | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jul 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 131K |
| Parameters | 2.8T | 29.6B |
| License | Modified MIT | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $3.00 | $0.350 |
| Output $/1M | $15.00 | $1.50 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 66.5% | 70.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.011 | $0.0013 |
| Avg speed / sample | 12.71s | 8.70s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 51.9% $0.020 | 41.0% $0.0020 |
| Counting | 46.0% $0.0046 | 66.2% $0.0008 |
| Identification | 81.3% $0.0041 | 81.3% $0.0006 |
| OCR | 93.0% $0.0094 | 92.1% $0.0012 |
| Data Extraction | 84.5% $0.0046 | 86.6% $0.0007 |
| Reasoning (low) | 42.4% $0.0044 | 57.6% $0.0010 |
| Reasoning (high) | 74.2% $0.037 | – |
Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B: Overview
Kimi K3 is a sparse Mixture-of-Experts large language model developed by Moonshot AI, with 2.8 trillion total parameters and a 1-million-token context window. The model activates 16 out of 896 experts per token using the Stable LatentMoE framework, and is built on two architectural innovations: Kimi Delta Attention (KDA), a hybrid linear attention mechanism that enables up to 6.3x faster decoding in long-context settings, and Attention Residuals (AttnRes), which selectively retrieves representations across model depth and delivers roughly 25% higher training efficiency. Together with refined training and data recipes, these structural advances yield approximately 2.5x better overall scaling efficiency compared to its predecessor Kimi K2. The model applies quantization-aware training from the supervised fine-tuning stage onward, using MXFP4 weights with MXFP8 activations for hardware compatibility. Thinking mode is always enabled at launch, with reasoning effort configurable via the reasoning_effort field.
Kimi K3 supports native visual understanding alongside text, accepting image inputs for tasks that combine software engineering and visual reasoning. It targets long-horizon coding, knowledge work, and agentic workflows, and ships in two variants: K3 Max for general chat and agent tasks, and K3 Swarm Max for large-scale parallel processing across many coordinated sub-agents. The model is compatible with the OpenAI SDK via an OpenAI-compatible API. Full model weights are scheduled for release by July 27, 2026 under a Modified MIT license, following the open-weight pattern established by the Kimi K2 model family. A technical report with full architecture, training, and evaluation details is expected to accompany the weights release.
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.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Glimmer 30B performed better. It scores higher on 3 of the six vision tasks and averages 70.8% (#14 of 28) against 66.5% (#19 of 28) for Kimi K3. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark, Muse Glimmer 30B leads with 66.2% against 46.0%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0013 per sample against $0.011. Kimi K3 is priced at $3.00 per 1M input tokens and $15.00 per 1M output; Muse Glimmer 30B is priced at $0.35 per 1M input tokens and $1.50 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Muse Glimmer 30B is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.7s per inference against 12.7s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for object detection and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.