Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
GLM-5.3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against GLM-5.3's 64.6 (B), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. GLM-5.3 leads on capability. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 2870 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
GLM-5.3 B
Best for Teams with an 8-GPU server who want an open coding and long-horizon agent model with a 1M-token context, or agents that call it through Z.ai or a hosted provider
Ahead on
- Capability, 80 against 50
Watch for
Z.ai's smallest build is 755.6 GB in FP8, with no local Ollama or LM Studio build
Best for Local agents and coding with image input on one 24 to 32 GB GPU or an Apple silicon laptop, where one tool call per turn is enough
Ahead on
- Reach, 90 against 55
- Risk, 80 against 50
- Agent interface, 75 against 70
- Documentation and upkeep, 65 against 58
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.8 against 2.8 out of 5
Watch for
One tool call per turn and no parallel calls
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | GLM-5.3 | Muse Glimmer 30B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%35 | 80 | 50 | GLM-5.3 +30 |
| Reach | 25%25 | 55 | 90 | Muse Glimmer 30B +35 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 50 | 80 | Muse Glimmer 30B +30 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 70 | 75 | Muse Glimmer 30B +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 58 | 65 | Muse Glimmer 30B +7 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 64.6/100 | BB 70/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | GLM-5.3 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Z.ai (Zhipu AI) | Meta |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | GLM-5.3 License (MIT-style, with a security review for the largest model-as-a-service operators) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-14 | 2026-10-20 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | 3.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
GLM-5.3
A large coding and long-horizon agent model with a 1M-token context, several tool calls per turn and three reasoning budgets. Z.ai's smallest build is 756 GB in FP8, so it needs an 8-GPU server, Z.ai's API or a provider. The main risks are no published safety work, no way to report a flaw, and thinking that can't be turned off.
Muse Glimmer 30B
A dense 30B multimodal cousin for local agent and coding work with images, documented tool calls and adjustable reasoning. Meta's 17 GB GGUF fits a 24 GB card and runs in llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers. The main risks are one tool call per turn, no documented JSON output and a usage policy that adds limits to Apache 2.0.
Before you call either
GLM-5.3
- Start it with
vllm serve zai-org/GLM-5.3 --kv-cache-dtype fp8 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --speculative-config.method mtp --speculative-config.num_speculative_tokens 5 --tool-call-parser glm47 --reasoning-parser glm47 --enable-auto-tool-choice --served-model-name glm-5.3(vLLM 0.28.0 or later, 8xH200 or 8xH20 per vLLM's recipe) - Use the glm47 tool-call and reasoning parsers in vLLM or SGLang; SGLang's cookbook says glm45 leaves the calls as plain text
- Pass
chat_template_kwargs: {"reasoning_effort": "low"}for short tasks; anything other than low or high falls back to max - Pass
clear_thinking: truein chat use, since the template keeps earlier reasoning by default - Don't send
enable_thinking: false; the template ignores it and always opens a think block - Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output is documented only for Z.ai's hosted API
- No Z.ai build fits a 128 GB machine; the full 1M context needs 8xB200 per vLLM's recipe
Muse Glimmer 30B
- Start it with
llama serve -hf meta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B-GGUF --hf-file Muse-Glimmer-30B-KQuant-17GB-Q4_K_M.gguf -ngl 99 -c 131072 --host 127.0.0.1 --port 8080 --chat-template-kwargs '{"reasoning_strength":"high"}'on llama.cpp b10353 or later, orollama run muse-glimmeron Ollama 0.32.7 or later - In vLLM pass
--tool-call-parser muse_glimmer --reasoning-parser muse_glimmer, in SGLangmusefor both, in ExecuTorch--tool-parser atem. Without them tool calls come back as plain text - Set reasoning per request with
chat_template_kwargs.reasoning_strength(low, medium, high or xhigh). llama.cpp and ExecuTorch don't readreasoning_effort, and ExecuTorch rejects it with a 400 - Expect one tool call per turn and return each result before the next. ExecuTorch's server rejects
tool_choice="required" - Keep temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 64, don't run greedy, and never stop on
<|eom|> - Leave max_tokens room for reasoning, since in llama.cpp a request cut off mid-thought returns empty content with finish_reason length
- For images add Meta's 1.4 GB mmproj GGUF, which takes the build to about 22 GB with the runtime's fifth
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, GLM-5.3 or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against GLM-5.3's 64.6 (B), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. GLM-5.3 leads on capability.
Other comparisons with GLM-5.3 or Muse Glimmer 30B
- Agents-A1-4B vs GLM-5.3
- Agents-A1-4B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- BigBang-v1 vs GLM-5.3
- BigBang-v1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs GLM-5.3
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs GLM-5.3
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs GLM-5.3
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs GLM-5.3
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3 vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-120b
- GLM-5.3 vs gpt-oss-20b
- GLM-5.3 vs Granite 4.2 3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Hy3
- GLM-5.3 vs Inkling
- GLM-5.3 vs Inkling-Small
- GLM-5.3 vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- GLM-5.3 vs Kimi K3
- GLM-5.3 vs Kolibri-1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna M.1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna S 2.1
- GLM-5.3 vs Laguna XS 2.1
- GLM-5.3 vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- GLM-5.3 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- GLM-5.3 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- GLM-5.3 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- GLM-5.3 vs occamy-1.0
- GLM-5.3 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- GLM-5.3 vs SmolLM3-3B
- GLM-5.3 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- GLM-5.3 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- gpt-oss-120b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Inkling-Small vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Inkling vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kolibri-1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna M.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs occamy-1.0
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/glm-5-3-vs-muse-glimmer-30b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/glm-5-3.json·/api/v1/tools/muse-glimmer-30b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare glm-5-3 muse-glimmer-30b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "glm-5-3", "b": "muse-glimmer-30b"}at/mcp, no key