GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI 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
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) scores 3.2 points higher (20.7 vs 17.5) but costs 2.3× as much to run the benchmark ($331 vs $146; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Muse Glimmer (High).
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 17.5 | −15.5% Muse Glimmer (High) is 15.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $145.77 | −56.0% Muse Glimmer (High) is 56.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 53.29s | 24.76s | −53.5% Muse Glimmer (High) is 53.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 15.5% less intelligence, 56.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 53.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)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/gpt-5-4-nano/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill