Muse Glimmer 30B vs CoBuddy
Muse Glimmer 30B comes out ahead, 53 to 46 on our weighted score, though CoBuddy is 6% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
MetaMuse Glimmer 30B
53/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context131K
BaiduCoBuddy
46/100- ECI—
- Price$0.28 / $1.13
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Muse Glimmer 30B is our pick
Muse Glimmer 30B is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against CoBuddy (46). 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 priceCoBuddyCoBuddy $0.492 · Muse Glimmer 30B $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameMuse Glimmer 30B 131,072 · CoBuddy 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsMuse Glimmer 30BMuse Glimmer 30B: Text, Images · CoBuddy: Text
- Self-hostingMuse Glimmer 30BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Muse Glimmer 30B | CoBuddy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 60 | 62 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 25 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 53/100 | 46/100 |
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 | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | CoBuddyBaidu |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.28 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | $1.13 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 | $0.492 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 11 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 13 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Aug 10, 2026 | May 6, 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.
- Muse Glimmer 30B$5.40
- CoBuddy$5.06
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Muse Glimmer 30B or CoBuddy?
Muse Glimmer 30B is the better all-round choice, scoring 53/100 against CoBuddy (46). 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, Muse Glimmer 30B or CoBuddy?
CoBuddy is cheaper at $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 $0.492 per million tokens for CoBuddy versus $0.525 for Muse Glimmer 30B (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Muse Glimmer 30B has not been scored yet and CoBuddy has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Muse Glimmer 30B and CoBuddy 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 and CoBuddy share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: Muse Glimmer 30B up to 131,072, CoBuddy up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Muse Glimmer 30B accepts text and images; CoBuddy accepts text. Muse Glimmer 30B 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 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Muse Glimmer 30B is the newest, released Aug 10, 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.
