Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ember-1 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs 11.5x less per output token than Ember-1 ($1.30 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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3BQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
53.5
Output $/M
$1.30
vs $15.00 vs $1.30 per 1M output tokens. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is 11.5x cheaper.

Ember-1 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B: which to pick

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for output tokens 11.5x cheaper ($1.30 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); Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on LMArena WebDev, Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and ALE-Bench. 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, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 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 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B $1.30 per million output tokens, 11.5x apart.
Context window
Ember-1 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 262K.

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 Index12 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1254Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 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
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured26.5%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured221.8Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1410Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1415Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1238Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1301Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured19.3Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured142.5Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
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 measured89.2%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$463Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)22.5%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.5%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured21.0%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured83.5%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1400Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1408Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1411Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured70.0%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1404Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1410Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1413Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1421Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1399Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1394Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards measured
General benchmarks for Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
BenchmarkEmber-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3BLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly Ember-1 measured
IFBenchNot measured72.5%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured72.0%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
DTBenchNot measured80.0%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMCANot measured29.5%Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena TextNot measured1395Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1379Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1347Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1407Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1378Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1457Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1367Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1326Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1355Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1412Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1390Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1376Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1385Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1390Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1389Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1365Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1347Only Qwen3.5-35B-A3B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ember-1$0.195Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.012Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ember-1$0.750Fits in one request
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B$0.045Fits in one request

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B 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 Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
SpecificationFireworks Ember-1Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
MakerFireworksQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 24, 2026February 25, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$3.00$0.1625
Output $/Mtok$15.00$1.30
Coding index52.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ember-1 better than Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for coding?

Only Ember-1 has a coding score, 52.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for output tokens 11.5x cheaper ($1.30 vs $15.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Ember-1 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Ember-1 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B costs $0.1625 and $1.30. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Ember-1 or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Ember-1, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

Has any benchmark tested both Ember-1 and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

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); Qwen3.5-35B-A3B on LMArena WebDev, Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) and ALE-Bench. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next