ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen-MT Turbo

Too close to call on our weighted score (Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 58, Muse Glimmer 30B 57, Qwen-MT Turbo 40). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
  2. Meta

    Muse Glimmer 30B

    Released Aug 10, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context131K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen-MT Turbo

    Released Jan 2025

    40/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.16 / $0.49
    • Context16K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 58/100, Muse Glimmer 30B 57/100, Qwen-MT Turbo 40/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen-MT Turbo on price and Muse Glimmer 30B for long inputs. 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 priceQwen-MT TurboQwen-MT Turbo $0.242 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.275 · Muse Glimmer 30B $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMuse Glimmer 30BMuse Glimmer 30B 131,072 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · Qwen-MT Turbo 16,384 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30BLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Muse Glimmer 30B: Text, Images · Qwen-MT Turbo: Text
  • Self-hostingLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMuse Glimmer 30BQwen-MT Turbo
Price50%766379
Inputs & features30%50700
Context window20%24240
Overall100%58/10057/10040/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen-MT Turbo specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaMuse Glimmer 30BMetaQwen-MT TurboAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.197$0.30$0.16 (best)
Output$0.51$1.20$0.49 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.275$0.525$0.242 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 10 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Max output4,096 tokens131,072 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoYesNo
Tool callingYesYesNo
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache 2.0Proprietary
API model ID——qwen-mt-turbo
API providers212 (best)1
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Aug 10, 2026Jan 2025
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023Jan 4, 2026Apr 2024
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
  • Muse Glimmer 30B$5.40
  • Qwen-MT Turbo$2.58
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen-MT Turbo?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 58/100, Muse Glimmer 30B 57/100, Qwen-MT Turbo 40/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen-MT Turbo on price and Muse Glimmer 30B for long inputs. 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, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen-MT Turbo?

Qwen-MT Turbo is cheaper at $0.16 input / $0.49 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct costs $0.197 input / $0.51 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers); Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 10 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.242 per million tokens for Qwen-MT Turbo versus $0.275 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct (1.1× as much) and $0.525 for Muse Glimmer 30B (2.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet, Muse Glimmer 30B has not been scored yet and Qwen-MT Turbo has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Muse Glimmer 30B and Qwen-MT Turbo yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-MT Turbo does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Glimmer 30B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and 16,384 for Qwen-MT Turbo. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Muse Glimmer 30B up to 131,072, Qwen-MT Turbo up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images; Muse Glimmer 30B accepts text and images; Qwen-MT Turbo accepts text. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30B publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen-MT Turbo is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Muse Glimmer 30B is the newest, released Aug 10, 2026. Qwen-MT Turbo came out Jan 2025; Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023, Muse Glimmer 30B Jan 4, 2026, Qwen-MT Turbo Apr 2024.

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 Oct 4, 2026.