Muse GlimmervsComposer 2
Muse Glimmer | Composer 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | 30B | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 76% | — |
Multilingual coding SWE-Bench MultilingualLike SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 73.7% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.1Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor. Higher is better. | — | 52.2% |
Next.js coding Next.js EvalsVercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | — | 75% |
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% | — |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.0Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 61.7% |
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. | 83.5% | — |
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% | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1359 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Aug 10 2026 | Mar 19 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Which is better: Muse Glimmer or Composer 2?
Muse Glimmer and Composer 2 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Composer 2 shipped 144 days before Muse Glimmer, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Muse Glimmer is open weight, while Composer 2 is proprietary.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Muse Glimmer and Composer 2 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.
Frequently asked questions
Muse Glimmer was released by Meta on Aug 10 2026.
Composer 2 was released by SpaceXAI on Mar 19 2026.
Muse Glimmer is an open weight model released by Meta. Composer 2 is a proprietary model released by SpaceXAI.
Other comparisons
Muse GlimmervsClaude Opus 5Composer 2vsClaude Opus 5Muse GlimmervsGPT-5.6-CyberComposer 2vsGPT-5.6-CyberMuse GlimmervsGemini 3.7 FlashComposer 2vsGemini 3.7 FlashMuse GlimmervsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Composer 2vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Muse GlimmervsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2vsMistral Medium 3.5Muse GlimmervsKimi K3Composer 2vsKimi K3