Muse Glimmer (High) vs Ring-2.6-1T
Which is better for the money: Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta or Ring-2.6-1T by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Muse Glimmer (High)
Ring-2.6-1T vs Muse Glimmer (High): 5.1% less intelligence, 294.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 3.0% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Muse Glimmer (High) | Ring-2.6-1T | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 17.5 | 16.6 | −5.1% Ring-2.6-1T is 5.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $145.77 | $575.60 | +294.9% Ring-2.6-1T is 3.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.78s | 24.04s | −3.0% Ring-2.6-1T is 3.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.30 / $2.50 | |
| 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 38.10 for $122.
- Ring-2.6-1T is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Muse Glimmer (High)Ring-2.6-1TToday'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/ring-2-6-1t · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-glimmer/ring-2-6-1t?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill