Model comparison
Muse Glimmer vs Qwen3.5 27B
Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.5 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 41.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3.5 27B in 5 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
Side by side
| Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 41.9 |
| Released | 2026-08-10 | 2026-02-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $2.40 |
| Results tracked | 15 | 28 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Glimmer leads
Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.9 (#168)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | 1358 |
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1427 |
| SciCode | 44.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 39.5% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 349.45 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.5 27B: —
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 201.98 |
Reasoning Qwen3.5 27B leads
Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144), Qwen3.5 27B: 27.5 (#117)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1414 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 47.9% |
| CritPt | 2.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 45.5% |
| DTBench | — | 82.4% |
| LMCA | — | 34% |
Math Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.8 (#127)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1429 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 56.7% |
Knowledge Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143), Qwen3.5 27B: 38.0 (#150)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1428 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Muse Glimmer: —, Qwen3.5 27B: 39.4 (#59)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1241 |
Multilingual Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122), Qwen3.5 27B: 50.8 (#115)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1390 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1478 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1390 |
| LMArena French | — | 1410 |
| LMArena German | — | 1393 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1345 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1358 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1407 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135), Qwen3.5 27B: 73.5 (#119)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1393 |
Long Context Qwen3.5 27B leads
Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129), Qwen3.5 27B: 43.1 (#106)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1413 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.5 27B leads
Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126), Qwen3.5 27B: 59.3 (#111)
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Qwen3.5 27B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1409 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1362 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1410 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer better than Qwen3.5 27B?
Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.5 27B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (41.7 vs 41.9), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Muse Glimmer or Qwen3.5 27B better for coding?
Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Qwen3.5 27B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 27B has 28.