LFM2.5-VL-3B vs Muse Glimmer-30B: Specs & Benchmark Comparison

LFM2.5-VL-3B is developed by Liquid AI, while Muse Glimmer-30B comes from Meta. Both were released in August 2026. Muse Glimmer-30B is the larger model at roughly 30 billion parameters, against 3 billion for LFM2.5-VL-3B.

The two models share 2 published benchmarks. Muse Glimmer-30B leads on 2 of them. The widest gaps are on IFBench, where Muse Glimmer-30B scores 77.0% against 25.8%; MMMU-Pro, where Muse Glimmer-30B scores 74.0% against 30.5%. Averaged across everything we track, LFM2.5-VL-3B sits at 63.7% and Muse Glimmer-30B at 65.1%.

CharacteristicLFM2.5-VL-3BMuse Glimmer-30B
CompanyLiquid AIMeta
Release DateAugust 12, 2026August 10, 2026
Parameters3B30B
MultimodalYesYes
Average Score63.7%65.1%
Benchmarks
IFBench25.8%77.0%
MMMU-Pro30.5%74.0%

Visual Benchmark Comparison

LFM2.5-VL-3B
Muse Glimmer-30B
IFBench0.3 vs 0.8
0.3
0.8
MMMU-Pro0.3 vs 0.7
0.3
0.7

Verdict

Both models show equal results — the choice depends on your specific use case.

Overall Performance

Both models show comparable average scores: LFM2.5-VL-3B — 0.6, Muse Glimmer-30B — 0.7.

Recency

Both models were released around the same time: 8/12/2026 and 8/10/2026.

More About These Models

Related Comparisons

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better for coding — LFM2.5-VL-3B or Muse Glimmer-30B?
Direct comparison on the SWE-Bench benchmark is not available. We recommend reviewing other metrics on the comparison page.
Which model is cheaper — LFM2.5-VL-3B or Muse Glimmer-30B?
API pricing data is available on the individual model pages.
Which has a larger context window — LFM2.5-VL-3B or Muse Glimmer-30B?
Context window data is available on the individual model pages.

The LFM2.5-VL-3B and Muse Glimmer-30B comparison is updated for 2026. Data includes benchmark results, API pricing, context window size and other specifications. For more detailed information, visit the LFM2.5-VL-3B or Muse Glimmer-30B page. See also the complete list of AI model comparisons.