CoBuddy vs Muse Glimmer 30B vs Perceptron Mk1
Muse Glimmer 30B comes out ahead, 53 to 46 and 45 on our weighted score, though Perceptron Mk1 is 7% cheaper per token.
BaiduCoBuddy
46/100- ECI—
- Price$0.28 / $1.13
- Context131K
- Our pick
MetaMuse Glimmer 30B
53/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context131K
Perceptron
Perceptron Mk1
45/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $1.50
- Context33K
Muse Glimmer 30B is our pick
Muse Glimmer 30B is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against CoBuddy (46) and Perceptron Mk1 (45). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest pricePerceptron Mk1Perceptron Mk1 $0.487 · CoBuddy $0.492 · Muse Glimmer 30B $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextCoBuddy and Muse Glimmer 30BCoBuddy 131,072 · Muse Glimmer 30B 131,072 · Perceptron Mk1 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsPerceptron Mk1CoBuddy: Text · Muse Glimmer 30B: Text, Images · Perceptron Mk1: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingMuse Glimmer 30BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | CoBuddy | Muse Glimmer 30B | Perceptron Mk1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 62 | 60 | 62 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 60 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 25 | 25 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 46/100 | 53/100 | 45/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | CoBuddyBaidu | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | Perceptron Mk1Perceptron |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.28 | $0.30 | $0.15 (best) |
| Output | $1.13 (best) | $1.20 | $1.50 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.492 | $0.525 | $0.487 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 11 providers | Median of 3 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenApache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 13 (best) | 3 |
| Released | May 6, 2026 | Aug 10, 2026 | May 12, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 4, 2026 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- CoBuddy$5.06
- Muse Glimmer 30B$5.40
- Perceptron Mk1$4.50
Which should you choose?
Which is better: CoBuddy, Muse Glimmer 30B or Perceptron Mk1?
Muse Glimmer 30B is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against CoBuddy (46) and Perceptron Mk1 (45). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, CoBuddy, Muse Glimmer 30B or Perceptron Mk1?
Perceptron Mk1 is cheaper at $0.15 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). CoBuddy costs $0.28 input / $1.13 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.487 per million tokens for Perceptron Mk1 versus $0.492 for CoBuddy (1× as much) and $0.525 for Muse Glimmer 30B (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. CoBuddy has not been scored yet, Muse Glimmer 30B has not been scored yet and Perceptron Mk1 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for CoBuddy, Muse Glimmer 30B and Perceptron Mk1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Perceptron Mk1 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
CoBuddy and Muse Glimmer 30B have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 32,768 for Perceptron Mk1. Maximum output per response: CoBuddy up to 65,536, Muse Glimmer 30B up to 131,072, Perceptron Mk1 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
CoBuddy accepts text; Muse Glimmer 30B accepts text and images; Perceptron Mk1 accepts text, images and video. Perceptron Mk1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Muse Glimmer 30B publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; CoBuddy and Perceptron Mk1 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Muse Glimmer 30B is the newest, released Aug 10, 2026. Perceptron Mk1 came out May 12, 2026; CoBuddy came out May 6, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Muse Glimmer 30B Jan 4, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
