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

Mistral Large 4 vs Muse Glimmer 30B

Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against Mistral Large 4's 54.6 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Mistral Large 4 leads on agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3588 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Mistral Large 4 C

Best for Operators with an 8-GPU Blackwell or H200 node who want a frontier-sized open model for coding agents and defensive security, with a hosted twin on Mistral's API.

Ahead on

  • Agent interface, 95 against 75

Watch for

The smallest 4-bit build needs about 732 GB, so nothing fits a single workstation or a 128 GB machine

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

  • Capability, 50 against 32
  • Reach, 90 against 50
  • Risk, 80 against 75

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

CategoryWeight this runMistral Large 4Muse Glimmer 30BEdge
Capability35%353250Muse Glimmer 30B +18
Reach25%255090Muse Glimmer 30B +40
Risk20%207580Muse Glimmer 30B +5
Agent interface10%109575Mistral Large 4 +20
Documentation and upkeep10%106465Muse Glimmer 30B +1
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 54.6/100BB 70/100

Facts side by side

FactMistral Large 4Muse Glimmer 30B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMistral AIMeta
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceMistral Ecosystem Open-Weight License (modified MIT)Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnoyes
Last release2026-10-292026-10-20
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 reviewsnone3.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Mistral Large 4

A frontier-sized open cousin for coding agents and defensive security, with strict JSON Schema output, parallel tool calls and three reasoning efforts. It needs a multi-GPU server, about 732 GB for the smallest 4-bit build, and vLLM and SGLang run it only from special images. The main risk is a licence that bars Model-as-a-Service businesses without a separate deal.

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

Mistral Large 4

  1. Serve the NVFP4 build on Blackwell with vllm/vllm-openai:mistral-large-4 --model mistralai/Mistral-Large-4-1T-A52B-NVFP4 --tensor-parallel-size 8 --kv-cache-dtype fp8_ds_mla --tool-call-parser mistral --reasoning-parser mistral --enable-auto-tool-choice; released vLLM doesn't load it
  2. On H200 use the FP8 build with tensor parallelism of 16 or 8 by 2 pipelines, per vLLM's recipe
  3. Pass reasoning_effort low, medium or high (default high); any other value makes the template raise an error, and there is no off switch
  4. Read the reasoning from message.reasoning; max_completion_tokens counts reasoning tokens too
  5. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 at every effort, per the card
  6. Ask for JSON with response_format type json_schema and strict true; the template passes the schema to the model
  7. The template rejects a tool message straight after a user message and a conversation that doesn't start with a user or system message
  8. Add --speculative-config '{"method": "dspark", "num_speculative_tokens": 3}' to use the embedded draft head
  9. If you'll offer it to others as a hosted model, read the licence first; Model-as-a-Service use needs Mistral's commercial licence

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, Mistral Large 4 or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) on agent readiness against Mistral Large 4's 54.6 (C), and leads in 4 of 5 scored categories. Mistral Large 4 leads on agent interface.

Other comparisons with Mistral Large 4 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.