Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Compare Muse Glimmer 30B and Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, Object Detection, and OCR.
Compare Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Flash 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
Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Flash on Vision Evals
Muse Glimmer 30B scores higher on 3 of the five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Muse Glimmer 30B leads 57.6% to 35.1%.
Overall, Muse Glimmer 30B averages 61.4% (#32 of 61) against 59.7% (#33 of 61) for Qwen3.8 Flash.
Qwen3.8 Flash is both cheaper ($0.0004 vs $0.0013 per sample) and faster (7.3s vs 10.6s per sample).
Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Flash Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 11, 2026
| Property | Muse Glimmer 30B | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Meta | Qwen |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Aug 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 131K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | 29.6B | 125B total, 6B active (+51B N-gram embeddings) |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Custom |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.300 | $0.150 |
| Output $/1M | $1.20 | $0.470 |
| 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 | 61.4% | 59.7% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0013 | $0.0004 |
| Avg speed / sample | 10.60s | 7.34s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 41.0% | 59.8% ±1.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.5 to 60.8 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 67.0% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.3 to 68.5 |
| Counting (low) | 66.2% | 56.3% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.0 to 59.5 |
| Counting (high) | – | 68.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.6 to 68.9 |
| Identification (low) | 81.3% | 88.5% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | – | 86.5% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | 60.7% | 58.9% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 60.1% | 62.9% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 57.6% | 35.1% ±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 31.1 to 37.8 |
| Reasoning (high) | 62.9% | 69.5% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.9 to 70.2 |
Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Flash: Overview
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.
Qwen3.8-Flash is a multimodal mixture-of-experts model from the Qwen team at Alibaba, and the production counterpart of the open-weight Qwen3.8-Flash-Next preview that introduces the architecture intended for the Qwen4 family. The main model carries 125 billion parameters alongside a separate 51 billion parameter N-gram embedding table, while activating roughly 6 billion parameters per token. It accepts interleaved image and text input and returns text, handling 262,144 tokens of context natively with extension to 1,000,000 tokens using YaRN. The production configuration runs with the 1M context window by default and adds built-in tool support.
Four architectural changes separate it from earlier Qwen releases: hybrid attention that pairs Gated DeltaNet for history compression with Qwen Sparse Attention, which uses a lightweight indexer to select micro-blocks of context; a Gated Residual scheme; N-gram embeddings; and training with the Muon optimizer, refined around orthogonalization accuracy and the division of parameters between Muon and AdamW. Qwen reports training cost around one ninth that of Qwen3.7-Plus, with QSA attention kernels measured up to 7.6 times faster in prefill and 4.9 times faster in decode at 1M-token context. Reported scores include 58.7 on DeepSWE 1.1, 62.5 on SWE-bench Pro, 84.5 on AndroidWorld and 95.7 on MathVision.