AI model comparison
Muse Glimmer 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
Meta
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B is a dense, open-weight multimodal model from Meta Superintelligence Labs, distilled from Muse Spark and optimized for autonomous agents on consumer hardware.
- Input / 1M
- $0.30
- Output / 1M
- $1.20
- Context
- 131K
StepFun
Step 3.7 Flash
Step 3.7 Flash is StepFun's latest high-efficiency multimodal Mixture-of-Experts model.
- Input / 1M
- $0.20
- Output / 1M
- $1.15
- Context
- 262K
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Step 3.7 Flash
1.2x cheaper for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Step 3.7 Flash
19.5 vs 17.5 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
Step 3.7 Flash
262K vs 131K tokens
Newer release
Muse Glimmer 30B
Released August 9, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
Coding index
Agentic index
Pricing
Muse Glimmer 30B vs Step 3.7 Flash API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.30 | $0.20 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $1.20 | $1.15 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | $0.04 | $0.04 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | Not available |
What it costs in practice
Estimated cost per 1,000 requests at standard rates. Coding and long-document figures also show the cost when the input is already cached.
Chat message
2K in, 500 out
Coding task
30K in, 4K out
Long document summary
150K in, 2K out
Specs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 131K tokens | 262K tokens |
| Max output | 16K tokens | 230K tokens |
| Input types | Image, Text | Image, Text, Video |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | Extra high, High, Medium, Low | High, Medium, Low |
| Default reasoning effort | Medium | Medium |
| Release date | August 9, 2026 | May 28, 2026 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Not supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs GPT-5.4 Nano
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs LongCat 2.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs MiniMax M2
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs GLM 4.6
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Step 5 Preview
- Step 3.7 Flash vs DeepSeek V3.2
- Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5 Mini
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash
- Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.4 Nano
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs MiniMax M2.5
- Step 3.7 Flash vs MiniMax M2.1
- Step 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.1-Codex-Mini
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- Step 3.7 Flash vs LongCat 2.0
- Step 3.7 Flash vs MiniMax M2
- Step 3.7 Flash vs GLM 4.6
- Step 3.7 Flash vs Step 3.5 Flash
Our take
Step 3.7 Flash is 1.2x cheaper for a typical chat. Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (19.5 vs 17.5). Step 3.7 Flash has the larger context window (262K vs 131K tokens). The right pick depends on your workload, so the quickest way to settle it is to send the same prompt to both and compare.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Glimmer 30B or Step 3.7 Flash cheaper?
Step 3.7 Flash is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.20 per 1M input tokens and $1.15 per 1M output tokens, while Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.30 per 1M input tokens and $1.20 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Muse Glimmer 30B or Step 3.7 Flash?
Step 3.7 Flash supports up to 262K tokens of context, compared with 131K for Muse Glimmer 30B.
Is Muse Glimmer 30B smarter than Step 3.7 Flash?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Muse Glimmer 30B scores 17.5 and Step 3.7 Flash scores 19.5, putting Step 3.7 Flash ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Muse Glimmer 30B and Step 3.7 Flash at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Muse Glimmer 30B and Step 3.7 Flash answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Muse Glimmer 30B and Step 3.7 Flash at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.