Fugu vs Ember-1
Fugu comes out ahead, 66 to 60 on our weighted score.
Fugu is our pick
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ember-1 (60). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Fugu unpriced
- Longest contextEmber-1Ember-1 1,048,576 · Fugu 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsFugu: Text, Images · Ember-1: Text, Images
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Fugu | Ember-1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 70 | 60 |
| Context window | 40% | 60 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 60/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification |  FuguSakana AI |  Ember-1Fireworks AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | $3.00 |
| Output | — | $15.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $6.00 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 7 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | — | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeshigh · xhigh | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | fugu | — |
| API providers | 1 | 7 (best) |
| Released | Jun 15, 2026 | Sep 22, 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.
- Fugu—
- Ember-1$60.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Fugu or Ember-1?
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ember-1 (60). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Fugu or Ember-1?
Ember-1 is cheaper at $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 $6.00 per million tokens for Ember-1 versus . Fugu has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Fugu has not been scored yet and Ember-1 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Fugu and Ember-1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both 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. Maximum output per response: Ember-1 up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Fugu accepts text and images; Ember-1 accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. Fugu and Ember-1 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Ember-1 is the newest, released Sep 22, 2026. Fugu came out Jun 15, 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.
