Ember-1 vs Fugu Ultra v2 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber
Ember-1 comes out ahead, 36 to 33 and 30 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Fireworks AIEmber-1
36/100- ECI—
- Price$3.00 / $15.00
- Context1.05M
Sakana AIFugu Ultra v2
33/100- ECI—
- Price$5.00 / $30.00
- Context1M
OpenAIGPT-5.6 Cyber
30/100- ECI—
- Price$12.50 / $75.00
- Context400K
Ember-1 is our pick
Ember-1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against Fugu Ultra v2 (33) and GPT-5.6 Cyber (30). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceEmber-1Ember-1 $6.00 · Fugu Ultra v2 $11.25 · GPT-5.6 Cyber $28.13 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextEmber-1Ember-1 1,048,576 · Fugu Ultra v2 1,000,000 · GPT-5.6 Cyber 400,000 tokens
- Widest inputsFugu Ultra v2Ember-1: Text, Images · Fugu Ultra v2: Text, Images, PDFs · GPT-5.6 Cyber: Text, Images
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Ember-1 | Fugu Ultra v2 | GPT-5.6 Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 12 | 0 | 0 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 70 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 60 | 44 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 33/100 | 30/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Ember-1Fireworks AI | Fugu Ultra v2Sakana AI | GPT-5.6 CyberOpenAI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $3.00 (best) | $5.00 | $12.50 |
| Output | $15.00 (best) | $30.00 | $75.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | $1.25 |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.00 (best) | $11.25 | $28.13 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 7 providers | Median of 6 providers | Official OpenAI API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens | 400,000 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | gpt-daybreak-red-latest |
| API providers | 7 (best) | 6 | 1 |
| Released | Sep 22, 2026 | Sep 11, 2026 | Aug 7, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Aug 28, 2026 | Feb 16, 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Ember-1$60.00
- Fugu Ultra v2$110.00
- GPT-5.6 Cyber$275.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ember-1, Fugu Ultra v2 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Ember-1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against Fugu Ultra v2 (33) and GPT-5.6 Cyber (30). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Ember-1, Fugu Ultra v2 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Ember-1 is cheaper at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers). Fugu Ultra v2 costs $5.00 input / $30.00 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers); GPT-5.6 Cyber costs $12.50 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $6.00 per million tokens for Ember-1 versus $11.25 for Fugu Ultra v2 (1.9× as much) and $28.13 for GPT-5.6 Cyber (4.7× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Ember-1 has not been scored yet, Fugu Ultra v2 has not been scored yet and GPT-5.6 Cyber has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ember-1, Fugu Ultra v2 and GPT-5.6 Cyber yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Ember-1 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Fugu Ultra v2 and 400,000 for GPT-5.6 Cyber. Maximum output per response: Ember-1 up to 131,072, Fugu Ultra v2 up to 128,000, GPT-5.6 Cyber up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ember-1 accepts text and images; Fugu Ultra v2 accepts text, images and PDFs; GPT-5.6 Cyber accepts text and images. Fugu Ultra v2 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Ember-1, Fugu Ultra v2 and GPT-5.6 Cyber are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Ember-1 is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Fugu Ultra v2 came out Sep 11, 2026; GPT-5.6 Cyber came out Aug 7, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Fugu Ultra v2 Aug 28, 2026, GPT-5.6 Cyber Feb 16, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
