# LongCat-2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30B (slim)

> Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) to LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/longcat-2-5-vs-muse-glimmer-30b.md (~9,300 tokens) · this version ~730 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/longcat-2-5-vs-muse-glimmer-30b.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/longcat-2-5-vs-muse-glimmer-30b
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-10
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against LongCat-2.5's 50.5 (D), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- LongCat-2.5: D 50.5, rank #145 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/longcat-2-5.min.md
- Muse Glimmer 30B: BB 70, rank #7 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/muse-glimmer-30b.min.md
- LongCat-2.5, good for Operators with NPU clusters, and anyone tracking what the open flagships can do
- Muse Glimmer 30B, good 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 35; Risk, 80 against 60; Documentation and upkeep, 65 against 46. Also Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better.

| Category | LongCat-2.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 35 | 90 |
| Risk (20%) | 60 | 80 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 75 | 75 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 46 | 65 |

| Fact (where they differ) | LongCat-2.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Meituan (LongCat) | Meta |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| llms.txt | no | yes |
| Last release | 2026-11-10 | 2026-10-20 |
| Terms last updated | not read yet | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 3.8/5 (4) |

Why the edge:
- Reach, Muse Glimmer 30B +55: LongCat-2.5 35 (Memory 0, the smallest build is Meituan's W4A4 repository, 1,336 GB, and 1,336 GB × 1.2 = 1,603 GB, far above 256 GB.); Muse Glimmer 30B 90 (Memory 25, Meta's 16.8 GB Q4_K_M GGUF needs about 20 GB with the runtime's fifth, so it fits a 24 GB card but not 16 GB.)
- Risk, Muse Glimmer 30B +20: LongCat-2.5 60 (File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository.); Muse Glimmer 30B 80 (File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF, with the ExecuTorch pos_embed.bin files read as raw embedding tables by their exact size and the Hub's scans, and no repos…)
- Documentation and upkeep, Muse Glimmer 30B +19: LongCat-2.5 46 (Model card 11, Intended use, limitations (the usage considerations), the architecture and the parameter counts are on the card.); Muse Glimmer 30B 65 (Model card 20, all seven parts present, languages as a count of more than 100. Training data 10, a general description with a 4 January 2026 cut-off and no sour…)