Solar Pro 4 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Muse Glimmer 30B
MiMo-V2.6-Pro comes out ahead, 67 to 57 and 55 on our weighted score.
Upstage
Solar Pro 4
55/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context524K
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Pro
67/100- ECI—
- Price$0.435 / $0.87
- Context1.05M
MetaMuse Glimmer 30B
57/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.20
- Context131K
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is our pick
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Muse Glimmer 30B (57) and Solar Pro 4 (55). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 priceSolar Pro 4 and Muse Glimmer 30BSolar Pro 4 $0.525 · Muse Glimmer 30B $0.525 · MiMo-V2.6-Pro $0.544 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.6-ProMiMo-V2.6-Pro 1,048,576 · Solar Pro 4 524,288 · Muse Glimmer 30B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-ProSolar Pro 4: Text · MiMo-V2.6-Pro: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Muse Glimmer 30B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-Pro and Muse Glimmer 30BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Solar Pro 4 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 63 | 62 | 63 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 45 | 80 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 49 | 61 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 67/100 | 57/100 |
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 | Solar Pro 4Upstage | MiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 (best) | $0.435 | $0.30 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | $0.87 (best) | $1.20 |
| Cached input | $0.06 | $0.0036 (best) | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.525 (best) | $0.544 | $0.525 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Upstage API | Official Xiaomi API | Median of 10 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 524,288 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | OpenApache 2.0 |
| API model ID | solar-pro4 | mimo-v2.6-pro | — |
| API providers | 3 | 16 (best) | 12 |
| Released | Aug 6, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 | Aug 10, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Feb 2026 | — | 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.
- Solar Pro 4$5.40
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro$6.09
- Muse Glimmer 30B$5.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Solar Pro 4, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Muse Glimmer 30B?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Muse Glimmer 30B (57) and Solar Pro 4 (55). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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, Solar Pro 4, MiMo-V2.6-Pro or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Solar Pro 4 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 10 API providers); MiMo-V2.6-Pro costs $0.435 input / $0.87 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.525 per million tokens for Solar Pro 4 versus $0.525 for Muse Glimmer 30B (1× as much) and $0.544 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro (1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Solar Pro 4 has not been scored yet, MiMo-V2.6-Pro 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 Solar Pro 4, MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Muse Glimmer 30B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 524,288 for Solar Pro 4 and 131,072 for Muse Glimmer 30B. Maximum output per response: Solar Pro 4 up to 131,072, MiMo-V2.6-Pro up to 131,072, Muse Glimmer 30B up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Solar Pro 4 accepts text; MiMo-V2.6-Pro accepts text, images, audio and video; Muse Glimmer 30B accepts text and images. MiMo-V2.6-Pro handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro and Muse Glimmer 30B publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Solar Pro 4 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Muse Glimmer 30B came out Aug 10, 2026; Solar Pro 4 came out Aug 6, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Solar Pro 4 Feb 2026, 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.