Fugu vs Ornith 1.0 9B
Fugu comes out ahead, 66 to 51 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
Sakana AI
Fugu
66/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1M
DeepReinforce
Ornith 1.0 9B
51/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Fugu is our pick
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ornith 1.0 9B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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
- Longest contextFuguFugu 1,000,000 · Ornith 1.0 9B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsFugu: Text, Images · Ornith 1.0 9B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingOrnith 1.0 9BPublishes downloadable weights (MIT)
| Measure | Weight | Fugu | Ornith 1.0 9B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 70 | 60 |
| Context window | 40% | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 51/100 |
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 | Ornith 1.0 9BDeepReinforce |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | — |
| Output | — | — |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | — |
| Long-context rate | — | — |
| Price source | — | — |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | — | — |
| 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 | OpenMIT |
| API model ID | fugu | — |
| API providers | 1 | — |
| Released | Jun 15, 2026 | Jun 25, 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—
- Ornith 1.0 9B—
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Fugu or Ornith 1.0 9B?
Fugu is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Ornith 1.0 9B (51). It leads on inputs & features and context window. 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 Ornith 1.0 9B?
None of these models has a 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 Ornith 1.0 9B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Fugu and Ornith 1.0 9B 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?
Fugu has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Ornith 1.0 9B.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Fugu accepts text and images; Ornith 1.0 9B accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Ornith 1.0 9B publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Fugu is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Ornith 1.0 9B is the newest, released Jun 25, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
