Llama 4 Maverick vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Maverick by Meta or Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Glimmer (High) scores 8.2 points higher (17.5 vs 9.3) but costs 3.3× as much to run the benchmark ($146 vs $44.0; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Glimmer (High) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Maverick | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.3 | 17.5 | +88.2% Muse Glimmer (High) is 88.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $43.98 | $145.77 | +231.4% Muse Glimmer (High) is 3.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.82s | 24.78s | +129.0% Muse Glimmer (High) is 129.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.92 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs Llama 4 Maverick: 88.2% more intelligence, 231.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 129.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Maverick is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Llama 4 MaverickMuse 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/llama-4-maverick/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-maverick/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill