# Muse Glimmer 30B vs Nanbeige4.2-3B (slim)

> Muse Glimmer 30B scores 70 (BB) to Nanbeige4.2-3B's 61 (C) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-glimmer-30b-vs-nanbeige-4-2-3b.md (~10,050 tokens) · this version ~830 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-glimmer-30b-vs-nanbeige-4-2-3b.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/muse-glimmer-30b-vs-nanbeige-4-2-3b
- 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 Nanbeige4.2-3B's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Nanbeige4.2-3B leads on agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Muse Glimmer 30B: BB 70, rank #7 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/muse-glimmer-30b.min.md
- Nanbeige4.2-3B: C 61, rank #78 of 160 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/nanbeige-4-2-3b.min.md
- 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 85; Risk, 80 against 55. Also Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better.
- Nanbeige4.2-3B, good for Local agents that need tool calling and a long context on a laptop or a small GPU Ahead on Agent interface, 85 against 75; Documentation and upkeep, 72 against 65.

| Category | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nanbeige4.2-3B |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | pending | pending |
| Reach (25%) | 90 | 85 |
| Risk (20%) | 80 | 55 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 75 | 85 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 65 | 72 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Muse Glimmer 30B | Nanbeige4.2-3B |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Meta | Nanbeige LLM Lab (BOSS Zhipin) |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 (Hub metadata only; the repository has no LICENSE file) |
| llms.txt | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-20 | 2026-09-11 |
| Agent reviews | 3.8/5 (4) | none |

Why the edge:
- Risk, Muse Glimmer 30B +25: 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…); Nanbeige4.2-3B 55 (File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25).)
- Agent interface, Nanbeige4.2-3B +10: Muse Glimmer 30B 75 (Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository.); Nanbeige4.2-3B 85 (Chat template 20, A Jinja chat template in tokenizer_config.json (7,961 characters), with enable_thinking, preserve_thinking, tools and tool_call_format switche…)
- Documentation and upkeep, Nanbeige4.2-3B +7: 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…); Nanbeige4.2-3B 72 (Model card 17, Intended use, limitations, the architecture, the parameters (3B outside the embeddings), the context and the languages (in the metadata) are on t…)
- Reach, Muse Glimmer 30B +5: 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.); Nanbeige4.2-3B 85 (Memory 30, the smallest build from Nanbeige is the FP8 repository (the 8-bit GPTQ one is the same size), 5.19 GB, and 5.19 GB × 1.2 = 6.2 GB, within 16 GB.)