Muse Glimmer (High) vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.7 Max scores 12.0 points higher (29.5 vs 17.5) but costs 16× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $146; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Muse Glimmer (High) | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 17.5 | 29.5 | +68.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 68.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $145.77 | $2,277.12 | +1462.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 16× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.78s | 16.67s | −32.7% Qwen3.7 Max is 32.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Muse Glimmer (High): 68.6% more intelligence, 1462.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 32.7% faster 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.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Muse Glimmer (High)Qwen3.7 MaxToday'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/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-glimmer/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill