Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ember-1 vs GPT-4o

Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Ember-1Fireworks
Coding
52.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$15.00
GPT-4oOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
vs $15.00 vs $10.00 per 1M output tokens. GPT-4o is 1.5x cheaper.

Decision reading

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

GPT-4o has the edge where output tokens cost 1.5x less.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Ember-1 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Code migration (Vals AI); GPT-4o on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Lite and SWE-bench (full test set). Compare them on price and context instead.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Ember-1 52.6 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-4o not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Ember-1 $15.00 against GPT-4o $10.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4o 128K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured38.8%Only GPT-4o measured
SWE-bench LiteNot measured38.0%Only GPT-4o measured
SWE-bench (full test set)Not measured18.8%Only GPT-4o measured
SWE-bench MultimodalNot measured30.4%Only GPT-4o measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)20.7%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)83.9%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)32.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
IOI (Vals AI)46.3%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)69.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured30.9%Only GPT-4o measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured8.3%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
Finance Agent (Vals AI)51.8%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)31.1%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)44.7%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)63.4%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)67.0%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)5.7%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Vals Science Index31.8%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured25.1%Only GPT-4o measured
GDPvalNot measured9.9%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)22.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured54.3%Only GPT-4o measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured2.4%Only GPT-4o measured
ARC-AGINot measured4.5%Only GPT-4o measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured6.0Only GPT-4o measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.0%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured74.8%Only GPT-4o measured
MMLUNot measured88.1%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured831Only GPT-4o measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured885Only GPT-4o measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured906Only GPT-4o measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured858Only GPT-4o measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured869Only GPT-4o measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured861Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
General benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4oLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
IFBenchNot measured34.3%Only GPT-4o measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured49.3%Only GPT-4o measured
DTBenchNot measured64.5%Only GPT-4o measured
LMCANot measured16.6%Only GPT-4o measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Ember-1$0.011Fits in one request
GPT-4o$0.0075Fits in one request

GPT-4o costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ember-1$0.195Fits in one request
GPT-4o$0.155Fits in one request

GPT-4o costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ember-1$0.750Fits in one request
GPT-4o$0.600Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Ember-1 and GPT-4o
SpecificationFireworks Ember-1OpenAI GPT-4o
MakerFireworksOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 24, 2026May 13, 2024
Context window1.05M128K
Input $/Mtok$3.00$2.50
Output $/Mtok$15.00$10.00
Coding index52.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ember-1 better than GPT-4o for coding?

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. GPT-4o has the edge where output tokens cost 1.5x less.

Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or GPT-4o?

Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o costs $2.50 and $10.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Ember-1 or GPT-4o?

Ember-1, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

Has any benchmark tested both Ember-1 and GPT-4o?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Ember-1 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Code migration (Vals AI); GPT-4o on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Lite and SWE-bench (full test set). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next