Muse Glimmer (High) vs Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta or Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) scores 0.9 points higher (18.4 vs 17.5) but costs 6.5× as much to run the benchmark ($941 vs $146; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Muse Glimmer (High) | Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 17.5 | 18.4 | +5.1% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 5.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $145.77 | $940.97 | +545.5% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 6.5× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 25.09s | 65.10s | +159.5% Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Re… is 159.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) vs Muse Glimmer (High): 5.1% more intelligence, 545.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 159.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
- Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Muse Glimmer (High)Qwen3.5 397B A17B (Reasoning)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/muse-glimmer/qwen3-5-397b-a17b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-glimmer/qwen3-5-397b-a17b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill