Ember-1 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed
Too close to call on our weighted score (Kimi K3.1 Pro 46, MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 46, Ember-1 36). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Fireworks AIEmber-1
36/100- ECI—
- Price$3.00 / $15.00
- Context1.05M
Moonshot AIKimi K3.1 Pro
46/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $10.00
- Context1.05M
XiaomiMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed
46/100- ECI—
- Price$4.35 / $8.70
- Context1.05M
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Kimi K3.1 Pro 46/100, MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 46/100, Ember-1 36/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K3.1 Pro 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 priceKimi K3.1 ProKimi K3.1 Pro $4.00 · MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed $5.44 · Ember-1 $6.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameEmber-1 1,048,576 · Kimi K3.1 Pro 1,048,576 · MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 1,048,576 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedEmber-1: Text, Images · Kimi K3.1 Pro: Text, Images, Video · MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Ember-1 | Kimi K3.1 Pro | MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 12 | 20 | 14 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 80 | 90 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 61 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 46/100 | 46/100 |
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 | Kimi K3.1 ProMoonshot AI | MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedXiaomi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $3.00 | $2.00 (best) | $4.35 |
| Output | $15.00 | $10.00 | $8.70 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.20 | $0.036 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.00 | $4.00 (best) | $5.44 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 7 providers | Official Moonshot AI API | Official Xiaomi API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · high · max | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | kimi-k3.1-pro | mimo-v2.6-pro-ultraspeed |
| API providers | 7 | 17 (best) | 9 |
| Released | Sep 22, 2026 | Oct 23, 2026 | Sep 21, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
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
- Kimi K3.1 Pro$40.00
- MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed$60.90
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ember-1, Kimi K3.1 Pro or MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Kimi K3.1 Pro 46/100, MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 46/100, Ember-1 36/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Kimi K3.1 Pro 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro or MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed?
Kimi K3.1 Pro is cheaper at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI API price). MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed costs $4.35 input / $8.70 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price); Ember-1 costs $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $4.00 per million tokens for Kimi K3.1 Pro versus $5.44 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed (1.4× as much) and $6.00 for Ember-1 (1.5× 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro has not been scored yet and MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ember-1, Kimi K3.1 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed share the same 1,048,576-token context window. Maximum output per response: Ember-1 up to 131,072, Kimi K3.1 Pro up to 131,072, MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ember-1 accepts text and images; Kimi K3.1 Pro accepts text, images and video; MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed accepts text, images, audio and video. MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Ember-1 and Kimi K3.1 Pro is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Kimi K3.1 Pro is the newest, released Oct 23, 2026. Ember-1 came out Sep 22, 2026; MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeed came out Sep 21, 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.
