Ember-1 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct
Ember-1 leads the LLM Stats Score 43.1 to -4.8. Mistral NeMo Instruct is 275.9x cheaper per token.
Fireworks AI · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Ember-1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.1 to -4.8, ranking #51 overall.
On price, Mistral NeMo Instruct is roughly 275.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Ember-1 also accepts a larger context window (1,040,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Ember-1
- overall performance matters — it scores 43.1 and ranks #51 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,040,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
Choose Mistral NeMo Instruct
- cost matters — it's about 275.9x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
4 reported for Ember-1 · 8 for Mistral NeMo Instruct
Ember-1 and Mistral NeMo Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Ember-1 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 157.9x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.02/1M tokens).
For output processing, Ember-1 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 500.0x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.03/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Ember-1 is more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Ember-1 has 2768.0B more parameters than Mistral NeMo Instruct, making it 23066.7% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Ember-1 accepts 1,040,000 input tokens compared to Mistral NeMo Instruct's 131,072 tokens. Only Mistral NeMo Instruct specifies output context (131,072 tokens).
License
Usage and distribution terms
Ember-1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Mistral NeMo Instruct uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Ember-1 was released on 2026-09-23, while Mistral NeMo Instruct was released on 2024-07-18.
Ember-1 is 27 months newer than Mistral NeMo Instruct.
Sep 23, 2026
2 weeks ago
2.2yr newerJul 18, 2024
2.2 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Ember-1 is available from Fireworks. Mistral NeMo Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Google, Mistral AI.
Ember-1
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Ember-1 and Mistral NeMo Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Ember-1 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct.