Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ember-1 vs GPT-4o (2024-08-06)

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs 1.5x less per output token than Ember-1 ($10.00 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Ember-1Fireworks
Coding
52.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$15.00
GPT-4o (2024-08-06)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
26.3
Output $/M
$10.00
vs $15.00 vs $10.00 per 1M output tokens. GPT-4o (2024-08-06) is 1.5x cheaper.

Ember-1 or GPT-4o (2024-08-06): which to pick

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o (2024-08-06) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($10.00 vs $15.00 per million).

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 (2024-08-06) on Aider polyglot, SWE-bench Lite and LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run). 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 (2024-08-06) 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 (2024-08-06) $10.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 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 (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured23.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SWE-bench LiteNot measured21.7%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 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 measured31.7%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured8.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1278Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured7.7Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
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 measured28.9%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)22.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured64.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured52.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured2.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured49.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleBenchNot measured17.8%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured6.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1264Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1241Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1277Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
AIMENot measured14.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured75.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured90.7%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured6.4%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured0.4%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MATH level 5Not measured53.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1285Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
MMLU ProNot measured74.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured39.4%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.1%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured61.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured88.2%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured26.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
MMLUNot measured84.3%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1274Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1252Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1275Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1232Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards measured
General benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-4o (2024-08-06)Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
IFBenchNot measured36.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured41.0%Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena TextNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1267Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1274Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1065Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1297Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1262Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1254Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1257Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1234Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1218Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1263Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1269Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1272Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1279Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1283Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1290Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1267Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1072Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1009Only GPT-4o (2024-08-06) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 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 (2024-08-06)$0.0075Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ember-1$0.195Fits in one request
GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.155Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ember-1$0.750Fits in one request
GPT-4o (2024-08-06)$0.600Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 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 (2024-08-06)
SpecificationFireworks Ember-1OpenAI GPT-4o (2024-08-06)
MakerFireworksOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 24, 2026August 6, 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 (2024-08-06) for coding?

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o (2024-08-06) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o (2024-08-06) for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($10.00 vs $15.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or GPT-4o (2024-08-06)?

Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o (2024-08-06) 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 (2024-08-06)?

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

Has any benchmark tested both Ember-1 and GPT-4o (2024-08-06)?

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 (2024-08-06) on Aider polyglot, SWE-bench Lite and LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next