Fugu Ultra vs Pareto 26.10 Preview
Pareto 26.10 Preview costs 9.4x less per output token than Fugu Ultra ($3.20 vs $30.00 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $30.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $3.20
Fugu Ultra or Pareto 26.10 Preview: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
No benchmark has tested both yet. Fugu Ultra has none yet; Pareto 26.10 Preview on GameBench 2. 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Pareto 26.10 Preview
Pareto 26.10 Preview takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Pareto 26.10 Preview
Fugu Ultra $0.020, Pareto 26.10 Preview $0.0024 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Fugu Ultra not benchmarked, Pareto 26.10 Preview 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
- Fugu Ultra $30.00 against Pareto 26.10 Preview $3.20 per million output tokens, 9.4x apart.
- Context window
- Fugu Ultra takes 1M tokens, Pareto 26.10 Preview 1.05M.
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 Index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Fugu Ultra | Pareto 26.10 Preview | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GameBench 2 | Not measured | 88.3 | Only Pareto 26.10 Preview measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 51 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
Pareto 26.10 Preview costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Pareto 26.10 Preview costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Pareto 26.10 Preview 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 | Sakana Fugu Ultra | Pareto 26.10 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Sakana | Unbiased |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | June 24, 2026 | October 1, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $5.00 | $0.80 |
| Output $/Mtok | $30.00 | $3.20 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Fugu Ultra better than Pareto 26.10 Preview for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Fugu Ultra or Pareto 26.10 Preview?
Fugu Ultra costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $30.00 per million output tokens; Pareto 26.10 Preview costs $0.80 and $3.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Fugu Ultra or Pareto 26.10 Preview?
Pareto 26.10 Preview, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Has any benchmark tested both Fugu Ultra and Pareto 26.10 Preview?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Fugu Ultra has none yet; Pareto 26.10 Preview on GameBench 2. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of November 14, 2026.