Muse Glimmer (high) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Muse Glimmer (high) by Meta or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Muse Glimmer (high)
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Muse Glimmer (high): 44.2% less intelligence, 213.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 77.9% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Muse Glimmer (high) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 18.1 | 10.1 | −44.2% Qwen3 Coder Next is 44.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $151.68 | $476.03 | +213.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.94s | 5.52s | −77.9% Qwen3 Coder Next is 77.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.35 / $1.50 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Glimmer (high) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores 26.40 for $138.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Muse Glimmer (high)Qwen3 Coder NextToday'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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-glimmer/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill