Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
LBS-27B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in every scored category. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3504 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
LBS-27B D
Best for Agents with about 96 GB of GPU memory that need to find click targets on dense professional screenshots, or read fine detail in large images, and can run a small crop loop and wait for independent results.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
No independent benchmark result yet; ScreenSpot-Pro, OS-World-G, PerceptionBench and HR-Bench numbers are inclusionAI's own runs
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 43
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
Watch for
One tool call per turn and no parallel calls
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | LBS-27B | Muse Glimmer 30B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| 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 | 43 | 65 | Muse Glimmer 30B +22 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | D 53.9/100 | BB 70/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | LBS-27B | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Meta |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 (the card's metadata and licence section; the LICENSE file sits in the GitHub repository inclusionAI/UI-Venus on its LBS branch, not in the Hugging Face repository) | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-26 | 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 | none | 3.8/5 (4) |
Verdicts
LBS-27B
A 27B Qwen3.8 fine-tune for GUI grounding that zooms into screenshots over a few turns before naming a point, and inclusionAI says it also helps with fine detail in large images. It needs about 96 GB at BF16 and a client that runs its crop actions. Every result so far is inclusionAI's own, with no safety results or injection guidance.
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
LBS-27B
- Serve with
vllm serve inclusionAI/LBS-27B --tensor-parallel-size 4 --max-model-len 65536, which is what the card's wrapper script runs; keep the context at 32,768 or more for multi-turn images - Build the system prompt with
build_system_promptfrom the LBS branch'szoomin_grounding_protocol.py, send the screenshot afterimage_path: <name>, and don't passtools; the model answers in plain text - Parse
<action>crop_image(image_path=..., x1=..., y1=..., x2=..., y2=...)</action>, cut the crop yourself and return it with its mapping to the original image; allow at most two crops per turn and three per episode - Read the final answer as
[x.xx,y.yy]on a 0 to 1000 scale of the original image, and use your own executor to click - Pass
reasoning_effortasxhigh,mediumorlowonly, since the template raises an error forhigh, and don't count onthinking_budget, which the template ignores - Don't turn on MTP speculative decoding; the MTP weights aren't in the repository though config.json names one MTP layer
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, LBS-27B or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against LBS-27B's 53.9 (D), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with LBS-27B or Muse Glimmer 30B
- Agents-A1-4B vs LBS-27B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- BigBang-v1 vs LBS-27B
- BigBang-v1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Carbon-X vs LBS-27B
- Carbon-X vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs LBS-27B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs LBS-27B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs LBS-27B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- GLM-5.3 vs LBS-27B
- GLM-5.3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- gpt-oss-120b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- gpt-oss-20b vs LBS-27B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs LBS-27B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Hy3 vs LBS-27B
- Hy3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Inkling-Small vs LBS-27B
- Inkling-Small vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Inkling vs LBS-27B
- Inkling vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs LBS-27B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kimi K3 vs LBS-27B
- Kimi K3 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kolibri-1 vs LBS-27B
- Kolibri-1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Kronos vs LBS-27B
- Kronos vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna M.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna M.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs LBS-27B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- LBS-27B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- LBS-27B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- LBS-27B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- LBS-27B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- LBS-27B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- LBS-27B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- LBS-27B vs occamy-1.0
- LBS-27B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- LBS-27B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- LBS-27B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- LBS-27B vs Recursive Flint
- LBS-27B vs SmolLM3-3B
- LBS-27B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- LBS-27B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- LBS-27B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- LBS-27B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- 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
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- 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 Recursive Flint
- 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)
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/lbs-27b-vs-muse-glimmer-30b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/lbs-27b.json·/api/v1/tools/muse-glimmer-30b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare lbs-27b muse-glimmer-30b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "lbs-27b", "b": "muse-glimmer-30b"}at/mcp, no key