Ember-1 vs GPT-4o-mini
GPT-4o-mini costs 25.0x less per output token than Ember-1 ($0.60 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- 52.6
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $15.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.60
Ember-1 or GPT-4o-mini: which to pick
Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick GPT-4o-mini for output tokens 25.0x cheaper ($0.60 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-mini on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Ember-1 has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GPT-4o-mini has a AA Intelligence Index result, 6.7.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only GPT-4o-mini has a GPQA Diamond result, 44.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only GPT-4o-mini has a AIME result, 11.5%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only GPT-4o-mini has a MMLU Pro result, 62.7%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Ember-1
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
GPT-4o-mini
Ember-1 $0.011, GPT-4o-mini $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ember-1 52.6 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-4o-mini 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-mini $0.60 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
- Context window
- Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-4o-mini 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 Index9 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 11.4 | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 26.4% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 20.7% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 83.9% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 32.5% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| IOI (Vals AI) | 46.3% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | 69.5% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 23.4% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 1.5% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 6.7 | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 126.5 | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 51.8% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 31.1% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 44.7% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 63.4% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 67.0% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 5.7% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 31.8% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 44.2% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 22.5% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 56.6% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 42.6% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 4.2% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 0.0% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 28.8% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 11.5% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.6% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 86.2% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 14.7 | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 14.7% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| GSM8K | Not measured | 91.3% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 62.7% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 45.5% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 60.5% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 54.5% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.4% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 64.8% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| MMLU | Not measured | 81.8% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ember-1 | GPT-4o-mini | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 66.2% | Not measured | Only Ember-1 measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 31.0% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 54.4% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 10.4% | Only GPT-4o-mini measured |
| PIQA | Not measured | 88.7% | Only GPT-4o-mini 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
GPT-4o-mini costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
GPT-4o-mini costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
GPT-4o-mini 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.
| Specification | Fireworks Ember-1 | OpenAI GPT-4o-mini |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Fireworks | OpenAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | September 24, 2026 | July 18, 2024 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $3.00 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $15.00 | $0.60 |
| Coding index | 52.6 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ember-1 better than GPT-4o-mini for coding?
Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o-mini has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o-mini for output tokens 25.0x cheaper ($0.60 vs $15.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or GPT-4o-mini?
Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o-mini costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Ember-1 or GPT-4o-mini?
Ember-1, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both Ember-1 and GPT-4o-mini?
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-mini on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.