Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

gpt-oss-120b vs Muse Glimmer 30B

gpt-oss-120b and Muse Glimmer 30B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 70.2 (BB) and 70 (BB). Muse Glimmer 30B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep. 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

gpt-oss-120b BB

Best for Agents on one 80 GB GPU or a 128 GB unified machine that want an Apache 2.0 reasoning model with wide runtime support

Ahead on

  • Risk, 95 against 80
  • Agent interface, 90 against 75

Watch for

Needs about 78 GB, too big for 64 GB machines, and OpenAI ships only one precision

Muse Glimmer 30B BB

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 75
  • Documentation and upkeep, 65 against 45

Watch for

One tool call per turn and no parallel calls

Score by category

CategoryWeight this rungpt-oss-120bMuse Glimmer 30BEdge
Capability35%355450gpt-oss-120b +4
Reach25%257590Muse Glimmer 30B +15
Risk20%209580gpt-oss-120b +15
Agent interface10%109075gpt-oss-120b +15
Documentation and upkeep10%104565Muse Glimmer 30B +20
Negative events≤1500
TotalBB 70.2/100BB 70/100

Facts side by side

Factgpt-oss-120bMuse Glimmer 30B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorOpenAIMeta
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2025-08-262026-10-20
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno 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 reviews3.5/5 (4)3.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

gpt-oss-120b

A reasoning and agent cousin that runs in most runtimes under Apache 2.0 with published safety work. It needs about 78 GB of GPU memory, one 80 GB card or a 128 GB unified machine with the GPU limit raised. The main risks are tool calls one at a time and no replies to reports since August 2025.

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

gpt-oss-120b

  1. Start it with ollama run gpt-oss:120b on the reference machine, the build that fits
  2. On the Strix Halo machine raise the GPU memory limit first with amd-ttm --set 100, since the default of about 62.8 GiB is below the 78 GB it needs
  3. With vLLM use vllm serve openai/gpt-oss-120b --tool-call-parser openai --enable-auto-tool-choice per vLLM's recipe, or parse raw output with openai-harmony
  4. Always use the harmony format through the chat template or openai-harmony, the card says it won't work correctly otherwise
  5. Set Reasoning: low in the system message for short tasks, medium is the default
  6. Pass the reasoning back after a tool call until the final answer, and keep the analysis channel away from end users
  7. Expect one tool call per turn and loop, don't wait for parallel calls

Muse Glimmer 30B

  1. 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, or ollama run muse-glimmer on Ollama 0.32.7 or later
  2. In vLLM pass --tool-call-parser muse_glimmer --reasoning-parser muse_glimmer, in SGLang muse for both, in ExecuTorch --tool-parser atem. Without them tool calls come back as plain text
  3. Set reasoning per request with chat_template_kwargs.reasoning_strength (low, medium, high or xhigh). llama.cpp and ExecuTorch don't read reasoning_effort, and ExecuTorch rejects it with a 400
  4. Expect one tool call per turn and return each result before the next. ExecuTorch's server rejects tool_choice="required"
  5. Keep temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 64, don't run greedy, and never stop on <|eom|>
  6. Leave max_tokens room for reasoning, since in llama.cpp a request cut off mid-thought returns empty content with finish_reason length
  7. 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, gpt-oss-120b or Muse Glimmer 30B?

gpt-oss-120b and Muse Glimmer 30B score within a point of each other on agent readiness, 70.2 (BB) and 70 (BB). Muse Glimmer 30B leads on reach and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with gpt-oss-120b or Muse Glimmer 30B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.