ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Muse Glimmer 30B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 58, Muse Glimmer 30B 57). 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
    Full specs Remove Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

  2. Meta

    Muse Glimmer 30B

    Released Aug 10, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Muse Glimmer 30B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

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), so choose by what matters most for your work: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 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 priceLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-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 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Muse Glimmer 30B: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMuse Glimmer 30B
Price50%7663
Inputs & features30%5070
Context window20%2424
Overall100%58/10057/100

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 specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaMuse Glimmer 30BMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.197 (best)$0.30
Output$0.51 (best)$1.20
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.275 (best)$0.525
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 10 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output4,096 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache 2.0
API model ID——
API providers212 (best)
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Aug 10, 2026
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023Jan 4, 2026
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
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

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

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is cheaper at $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 $0.275 per million tokens for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct versus $0.525 for Muse Glimmer 30B (1.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet and Muse Glimmer 30B 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 and Muse Glimmer 30B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

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. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Muse Glimmer 30B up to 131,072 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. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Muse Glimmer 30B is the newest, released Aug 10, 2026. 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.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons