Claude Opus 4.1vsMuse Glimmer
Claude Opus 4.1 | Muse Glimmer | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 30B |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 43% | — |
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 51.2% |
Coding SWE-Bench VerifiedReal coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 74.5% | 76%Best |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 51.7% |
Multi-step tool use MCP AtlasCan the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | — | 75.5% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 22% |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 80.9% | 83.5%Best |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | — | 65.9% |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 953 |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | — | 78.8% |
Multimodal reasoning MMMU-ProA tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 74% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | Meta |
| Release date | Aug 5 2025 | Aug 10 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: Claude Opus 4.1 or Muse Glimmer?
Muse Glimmer leads Claude Opus 4.1 on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Verified, GPQA Diamond). Claude Opus 4.1 shipped 370 days before Muse Glimmer, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Claude Opus 4.1 is proprietary, while Muse Glimmer is open weight.
On SWE-Bench Verified, Muse Glimmer leads at 76% vs Claude Opus 4.1 at 74.5%. On GPQA Diamond, Muse Glimmer leads at 83.5% vs Claude Opus 4.1 at 80.9%.
Frequently asked questions
Claude Opus 4.1 was released by Anthropic on Aug 5 2025.
Muse Glimmer was released by Meta on Aug 10 2026.
Muse Glimmer leads on SWE-Bench Verified — Claude Opus 4.1 74.5% vs Muse Glimmer 76%.
Muse Glimmer leads on GPQA Diamond — Claude Opus 4.1 80.9% vs Muse Glimmer 83.5%.
Claude Opus 4.1 is a proprietary model released by Anthropic. Muse Glimmer is an open weight model released by Meta.