Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ember-1 vs GPT-5.4

GPT-5.4 leads Ember-1 on coding, 64.4 to 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, at about the same output price ($15.00 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 2 benchmarks have a result for both.

Ember-1Fireworks
Coding
52.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$15.00
1
GPT-5.4OpenAI
Coding
64.4
Overall
69.6
Output $/M
$15.00
1
vs boards won of 2 shared

Ember-1 or GPT-5.4: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.4 for coding: it scores 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.6 for Ember-1.

Pick Ember-1 for work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
2
Ember-1 only
12
GPT-5.4 only
108
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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-5.4 64.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 9.5 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): Ember-1 83.9% against GPT-5.4 67.4%, 16.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Both cost $15.00 per million output tokens.
Context window
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-5.4 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryEmber-1BarsGPT-5.4Ties
Coding11
All shared boards11
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11
Coding benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1464Only GPT-5.4 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured71.1Only GPT-5.4 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured78.2%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)20.7%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)83.9%67.4%Ember-1
Code migration (Vals AI)32.5%35.0%GPT-5.4
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
IOI (Vals AI)46.3%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured51.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)69.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured57.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured81.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured31.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
WeirdMLNot measured77.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MirrorCodeNot measured15.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1607.0Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1496Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1491Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1454Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1478Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1436Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured39.0Only GPT-5.4 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured157.3Only GPT-5.4 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index18 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1059Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1017Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1087Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1030Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1135Only GPT-5.4 measured
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 measured87.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured52.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
METR time horizonsNot measured74.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured35.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
PostTrainBenchNot measured19.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$6,144Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured91.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)22.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured87.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured92.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured43.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured93.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGINot measured93.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured74.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured37.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
EBR-benchNot measured25.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1485Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1507Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1479Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1327Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1336Only GPT-5.4 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured63.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
AIMENot measured96.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured97.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured78.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured49.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ProofBenchNot measured56.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1488Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1497Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured63.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured65.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured41.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured45.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1479Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1458Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1486Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1474Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1199Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1215Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1195Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1196Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1066Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1180Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1142Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1188Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index35 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
IFBenchNot measured73.9%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured82.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
DTBenchNot measured94.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMCANot measured52.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CL-benchNot measured27.9%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured37.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured21.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1469Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1469Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1439Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1303Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1467Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1465Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1520Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1472Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1485Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1449Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1493Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1452Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1480Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1472Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1482Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1473Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1458Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1438Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1301Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1354Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1312Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1284Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1251Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1283Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1471Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Ember-1 and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkEmber-1GPT-5.4Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 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-5.4$0.010Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ember-1$0.195Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.170Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ember-1$0.750Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.650Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 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-5.4
SpecificationFireworks Ember-1OpenAI GPT-5.4
MakerFireworksOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 24, 2026March 5, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$3.00$2.50
Output $/Mtok$15.00$15.00
Coding index52.664.4
Independent measurements behind it23
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ember-1 better than GPT-5.4 for coding?

Pick GPT-5.4 for coding: it scores 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.6 for Ember-1. Pick Ember-1 for work measured by Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or GPT-5.4?

Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Ember-1 or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks is the Ember-1 vs GPT-5.4 comparison based on?

2 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Ember-1's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.4's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/fireworks-ember-1-vs-gpt-5-4" title="Ember-1 vs GPT-5.4, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/fireworks-ember-1-vs-gpt-5-4">LLMBenchmark.ai, Ember-1 vs GPT-5.4</a></p>