Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ember-1 vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs 45.1x less per output token than Ember-1 ($0.3325 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Ember-1Fireworks
Coding
52.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$15.00
Llama 3.2 3B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.3325
vs $15.00 vs $0.3325 per 1M output tokens. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is 45.1x cheaper.

Ember-1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct: which to pick

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3.2 3B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for output tokens 45.1x cheaper ($0.3325 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); Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT. 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, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 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 Llama 3.2 3B Instruct $0.3325 per million output tokens, 45.1x apart.
Context window
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 131K.

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 Index8 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
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 measured8.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1098Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1103Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured5.7Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
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 measured21.1%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured10.1%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured21.9%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)22.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.5%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured5.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1095Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1090Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1141Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured3.3Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1126Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1128Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.7%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1106Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1104Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1115Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1074Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards measured
General benchmarks for Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
BenchmarkEmber-1Llama 3.2 3B InstructLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
IFBenchNot measured26.2%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured4.3%Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1110Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1089Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1094Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1180Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1019Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1017Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1056Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured949Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1105Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1100Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1096Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1083Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 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
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ember-1$0.195Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0035Fits in one request

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ember-1$0.750Fits in one request
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.013Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 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 Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
SpecificationFireworks Ember-1Meta Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
MakerFireworksMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 24, 2026September 25, 2024
Context window1.05M131K
Input $/Mtok$3.00$0.0505
Output $/Mtok$15.00$0.3325
Coding index52.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ember-1 better than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for coding?

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3.2 3B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for output tokens 45.1x cheaper ($0.3325 vs $15.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs $0.0505 and $0.3325. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Ember-1 or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Ember-1, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

Has any benchmark tested both Ember-1 and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

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); Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run), LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next