GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 17.1 points higher (34.6 vs 17.5) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($179 vs $146; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Muse Glimmer (High).
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.6 | 17.5 | −49.4% Muse Glimmer (High) is 49.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $179.33 | $145.77 | −18.7% Muse Glimmer (High) is 18.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.39s | 24.87s | −38.4% Muse Glimmer (High) is 38.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh): 49.4% less intelligence, 18.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 38.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
GPT-5.6 Luna (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-5-6-luna-xhigh/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-xhigh/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill