Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) by Google or Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Glimmer (High) scores 8.6 points higher (17.5 vs 8.9) but costs 9.9× as much to run the benchmark ($146 vs $14.7; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Glimmer (High) when you need intelligence above 8.9, and Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) when 8.9 is enough.
| Metric | Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.9 | 17.5 | +96.6% Muse Glimmer (High) is 96.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.68 | $145.77 | +893.0% Muse Glimmer (High) is 9.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.75s | 24.76s | −57.1% Muse Glimmer (High) is 57.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.02 / $0.10 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning): 96.6% more intelligence, 893.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 57.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Gemma 4 E4B (Reasoning)Muse Glimmer (High)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e4b/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill