Qubrid AI
ModelsAI AppliancesGPU CloudPricingBlogsDocs
Qubrid AIQubrid AI

Qubrid AI - The Full AI Stack is designed to give developers, researchers, and enterprises the GPU performance, AI-ready software, and cost-efficiency needed to unlock the full potential of AI.

Official Partner

NVIDIA PartnerNVIDIA Partner

2026 Qubrid AI, All rights reserved.

Navigations

  • AI Appliances
  • GPU Virtual Machine
  • Managed AI Inference & GPU Infrastructure Hosting
  • AI/ML Templates
  • Playground
  • Pricing
  • Model Catalog
  • Returns & Refunds
  • Contact Us

Developers

  • Documentation
  • Platform Updates
  • Model Updates
  • GitHub
  • Cookbook

Solutions

  • Enterprise OCR & RAG
  • AI Automation & Workflows
  • Custom Built AI Agents for Production
  • Clinical & Research Analysis
  • AI-Powered Marketing & Prospect Outreach

Company

  • About Us
  • Partners
  • Blog & News
  • Case Studies
  • Brand Kit
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Data Retention Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Acceptable Use
  • Safety & Responsible Use
  • Returns & Refunds
    Blog & News

    Last updated Sep 3, 2026.

    Muse Glimmer Pricing: API Cost per 1M Tokens

    9 minutes read

    Shubham Tribedi

    Shubham Tribedi

    Muse Glimmer Pricing: API Cost per 1M Tokens
    Table of contents
    • Muse Glimmer rate card
    • How that compares to the tracked market
    • The 88% cache discount, and why it matters more here
    • Worked example
    • How to earn cache hits
    • Monthly cost estimates
    • Reasoning strength is a cost control
    • API versus self-hosting: an unusually close call
    • What the hardware actually costs you
    • The number that decides it
    • When each option wins
    • Frequently asked questions
    • Start building
    Muse Glimmer pricingMuse Glimmer priceMuse Glimmer API pricingMuse Glimmer costMuse Glimmer cost per tokenMuse Glimmer API costMuse Glimmer hardware requirementsMuse Glimmer self-hosting

    Table of contents

    • Muse Glimmer rate card
    • How that compares to the tracked market
    • The 88% cache discount, and why it matters more here
    • Worked example
    • How to earn cache hits
    • Monthly cost estimates
    • Reasoning strength is a cost control
    • API versus self-hosting: an unusually close call
    • What the hardware actually costs you
    • The number that decides it
    • When each option wins
    • Frequently asked questions
    • Start building
    Muse Glimmer pricingMuse Glimmer priceMuse Glimmer API pricingMuse Glimmer costMuse Glimmer cost per tokenMuse Glimmer API costMuse Glimmer hardware requirementsMuse Glimmer self-hosting

    Quick answer: Muse Glimmer costs $0.25 per 1M input tokens and $1.05 per 1M output tokens on Qubrid AI, with implicit cached input at $0.03 per 1M tokens. That is a blended rate of roughly $0.176 per 1M tokens at a standard 7:2:1 ratio, below the $0.23 median Artificial Analysis tracks across providers serving this model.

    Muse Glimmer rate card

    Pay-as-you-go, no minimum commitment, no reserved capacity requirement.

    Token type

    Qubrid price

    Input

    $0.25 / 1M tokens

    Output

    $1.05 / 1M tokens

    Implicit cache

    $0.03 / 1M tokens

    Model string: meta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B. Endpoint: https://platform.qubrid.com/v1.

    Output is priced at 4.2x input, a narrower ratio than most reasoning models carry, which matters because Muse Glimmer is a reasoning model whose thinking tokens bill as output.

    How that compares to the tracked market

    Artificial Analysis tracks a median of $0.325 per 1M input and $1.35 per 1M output across providers serving Muse Glimmer, for a blended rate of $0.23 per 1M tokens at a 7:2:1 ratio.

    Qubrid AI

    Tracked median

    Input

    $0.25

    $0.325

    Output

    $1.05

    $1.35

    Blended (7:2:1)

    $0.176

    $0.23

    Roughly 23% below the tracked median on a blended basis.

    The 88% cache discount, and why it matters more here

    Cached input at $0.03 against $0.25 uncached is an 88% discount, among the steeper implicit-cache discounts on any model.

    That discount does disproportionate work on this particular model, because of what Muse Glimmer is for. Agent loops re-send a large, stable prefix on every single turn: the Reasoning strength directive, system instructions, tool schemas, few-shot examples, accumulated conversation. Identical, call after call, for the length of the session.

    Worked example

    An agent runs a 12-turn session with a 40,000-token system prompt and tool schema that never changes:

    • Without cache hits: 12 × 40,000 × $0.25 / 1,000,000 = $0.120

    • With cache hits after turn one: (40,000 × $0.25 + 440,000 × $0.03) / 1,000,000 = $0.023

    An 81% reduction on the static portion of input spend, before counting the actual conversation.

    How to earn cache hits

    Order your prompt by descending stability:

    1. Reasoning strength: high

    2. System instructions

    3. Tool and function schemas

    4. Few-shot examples

    5. Documents that persist across the session

    6. Conversation history

    7. The current user message

    The common and expensive mistake is injecting a timestamp, session ID or user name near the front. One variable token at position two means you never earn a cache hit for the entire session. Move it to the end.

    There is a happy accident in this model's design worth noting: because reasoning strength is set through the system prompt rather than an API parameter, it sits naturally at the front of the stable prefix. The setting that controls your reasoning cost is itself cached.

    Monthly cost estimates

    Assuming no cache hits, so treat these as ceilings:

    Monthly volume

    Input cost

    Output cost

    Total

    5M in / 1M out

    $1.25

    $1.05

    $2.30

    50M in / 10M out

    $12.50

    $10.50

    $23.00

    250M in / 50M out

    $62.50

    $52.50

    $115.00

    1B in / 200M out

    $250.00

    $210.00

    $460.00

    Apply your real cache hit rate to the input column and these drop substantially. On agentic workloads with a stable prefix, a 70% hit rate takes the input column down by roughly three quarters.

    Reasoning strength is a cost control

    Muse Glimmer supports four reasoning levels: low, medium, high and xhigh. Meta recommends high or xhigh for complex problem solving, coding and agentic tasks.

    Reasoning tokens bill as output at $1.05 per 1M. Setting the level deliberately rather than defaulting to high on everything is the most direct lever you have.

    Workload

    Reasoning strength

    Effect on cost

    Classification, routing, extraction, short summarisation

    low

    Lowest output spend

    Chat, RAG answering, simple lookups

    medium

    Modest reasoning, most of the quality

    Coding, tool use, agentic workflows

    high

    Meta's recommendation for this class of work

    Hard multi-step problems, long-horizon planning

    xhigh

    Reserve for a fraction of traffic

    One thing working in your favour: Artificial Analysis measured Muse Glimmer generating 48M output tokens across its Intelligence Index, exactly at the class median, and rates it fairly concise. Unlike some reasoning models that quietly triple your output bill, this one reasons efficiently.

    Remember that the setting lives in the system prompt as Reasoning strength: <value>, not in an API parameter. A reasoning_effort argument carried over from another model family is silently ignored, which means you are paying for whatever the default does.

    API versus self-hosting: an unusually close call

    For most models this comparison is one-sided. Muse Glimmer is the exception, because Meta built it specifically to run on hardware you might already own, and released everything under Apache 2.0: BF16 weights, two 4-bit quantized variants, the DFlash drafter and the perception encoder.

    So the honest answer here is that self-hosting is a real option, and the decision turns on details rather than on obvious economics.

    What the hardware actually costs you

    Meta compressed the language model to approximately 4-bit precision, shrinking it to under 20 GB, leaving headroom for the KV cache, the perception encoder and the DFlash drafter to run together inside a 24GB or 32GB envelope.

    Build

    Target hardware

    Measured degradation

    Full precision (BF16)

    64GB VRAM

    -

    K-Quant-Dynamic

    32GB VRAM

    0.2%

    K-Quant-17GB

    24GB VRAM

    1.0%

    Degradation was averaged across accuracy metrics on 15 common benchmarks. It is small, and Meta validated it carefully. But note what the table implies: running locally means running quantized, because 64GB of VRAM is not consumer hardware. Hosted serving does not carry that constraint.

    Per NVIDIA's technical blog, the model fits within a single GPU's VRAM with no sharding, CPU offloading or external endpoints, across GeForce RTX 5090, DGX Spark, DGX Station and Jetson platforms.

    The number that decides it

    Meta's local throughput figures look excellent:

    Hardware

    Baseline tok/s

    With DFlash

    Speedup

    NVIDIA RTX 5090

    74.9

    233.4

    3.1x

    Apple M5 Max

    26.6

    50.2

    1.8x

    Apple M4 Max

    23.7

    37.8

    1.5x

    Then read the footnote. These were measured at batch size 1 with greedy decoding.

    That is one request at a time. A single consumer GPU serving ten concurrent agent sessions does not deliver ten times 233 tokens per second, it degrades sharply. Server-side continuous batching is what makes concurrent throughput work, and it is not something one card under a desk does well.

    If your deployment is one user with one agent, the local numbers are real and excellent. If it is a product serving many users, they describe a benchmark rather than your workload.

    When each option wins

    Self-host when: you are building a genuinely on-device agent where the point is that data never leaves the machine, you have air-gap or residency requirements, traffic is single-user or low-concurrency, or you already own suitable hardware sitting idle.

    Use the API when: you need concurrency, you want full-precision serving rather than a 4-bit build, you are deploying into CI pipelines, serverless functions or container fleets that cannot host a 20GB model, you need consistent behaviour across a team rather than ten slightly different local setups, or you are still evaluating whether the model fits at all.

    At $0.25 input and $1.05 output, a workload running 50M input and 10M output tokens a month costs about $23. That is below the monthly cost of most GPU rentals capable of serving the model with any concurrency, before engineering time and before idle capacity.

    If dedicated hardware turns out to be right for you, Qubrid also provides on-demand GPU compute and on-premises AI appliances, so the decision does not require changing vendors.

    Frequently asked questions

    How much does Muse Glimmer cost per 1M tokens? $0.25 per 1M input tokens and $1.05 per 1M output tokens on Qubrid AI, with implicit cached input at $0.03 per 1M tokens.

    What is the blended price of Muse Glimmer? Roughly $0.176 per 1M tokens at a standard 7:2:1 cache-hit, input, output ratio, against a $0.23 median tracked across providers by Artificial Analysis.

    How much does cached input cost on Muse Glimmer? $0.03 per 1M tokens, an 88% discount against uncached input. On multi-turn agent workloads with a stable prefix, that typically removes around 80% of input spend.

    Are reasoning tokens billed separately? No, they bill at the output rate of $1.05 per 1M tokens. Artificial Analysis rates the model fairly concise at 48M output tokens across its Intelligence Index, exactly at the class median.

    Is there a free tier for Muse Glimmer? Qubrid is pay-as-you-go with no minimum commitment, so you can evaluate at whatever volume your test needs. The weights are also Apache 2.0 if you prefer to run it yourself at hardware cost.

    Is the API cheaper than self-hosting Muse Glimmer? It depends on concurrency more than on volume. For single-user local agents, self-hosting is genuinely competitive and is what Meta designed for. For anything serving concurrent users, the batch-size-1 local throughput figures do not carry over and the API wins.

    What hardware do I need to run Muse Glimmer locally? 24GB of VRAM for the K-Quant-17GB build at 1.0% degradation, 32GB for K-Quant-Dynamic at 0.2%, or 64GB for full precision. It fits a single GPU with no sharding.

    Does running Muse Glimmer locally reduce quality? Slightly, and Meta published the numbers: 0.2% average degradation for the 32GB build and 1.0% for the 24GB build, measured across 15 common benchmarks. Full precision needs 64GB of VRAM, which hosted serving can provide and a laptop cannot.

    Does the price change with context length? No. The rate is flat across the 131,072-token context window. Longer prompts cost more because they contain more tokens, not because of a tier change.

    How do I reduce my Muse Glimmer bill? Two levers. Order your prompt so invariant content comes first and earn the 88% cache discount, and set Reasoning strength deliberately rather than leaving every request at high.

    Start building

    meta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B is live on Qubrid AI at $0.25 per 1M input tokens.

    1. Generate an API key at platform.qubrid.com

    2. Point your OpenAI SDK at https://platform.qubrid.com/v1

    3. Set model="meta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B"

    4. Put Reasoning strength: high at the top of your system prompt

    Qubrid AI serves 60+ open-source models behind one OpenAI-compatible API, alongside on-demand GPU compute and on-premises appliances.

    Related posts

    View all posts
    Meta Muse Glimmer: Benchmarks, API Pricing, and the Complete Developer Guide
    September 3, 2026

    Meta Muse Glimmer: Benchmarks, API Pricing, and the Complete Developer Guide

    Complete Meta Muse Glimmer guide: official and independent benchmarks, API pricing at $0.25/1M input tokens, architecture, hardware specs, and production code

    Shubham TribediShubham Tribedi