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 2026-09-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Muse Glimmer (high)
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Muse Glimmer (high): 47.4% less intelligence, 214.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 76.6% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Muse Glimmer (high) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 17.5 | 9.2 | −47.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 47.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $151.68 | $476.23 | +214.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.72s | 6.71s | −76.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 76.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.35 / $1.50 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
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 37.30 for $122.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
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