Ember-1 vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct
Ember-1 leads the LLM Stats Score 43.1 to 8.4. Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct is 56.5x cheaper per token.
Fireworks AI · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Ember-1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.1 to 8.4, ranking #51 overall.
On price, Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct is roughly 56.5x 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 Small 3.2 24B Instruct
- cost matters — it's about 56.5x 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 · 15 for Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct
Ember-1 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B 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 40.0x more expensive than Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct ($0.07/1M tokens).
For output processing, Ember-1 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 75.0x more expensive than Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct ($0.20/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Ember-1 is more expensive than Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Ember-1 has 2756.4B more parameters than Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct, making it 11679.7% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Ember-1 accepts 1,040,000 input tokens compared to Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Only Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ember-1 does not.
Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Ember-1
Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Ember-1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Mistral Small 3.2 24B 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 Small 3.2 24B Instruct was released on 2025-06-20.
Ember-1 is 15 months newer than Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct.
Sep 23, 2026
2 weeks ago
1.3yr newerJun 20, 2025
1.3 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-10-01, while Ember-1's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-10-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ember-1's cutoff date.
—
Oct 2023
Provider Availability
Ember-1 is available from Fireworks. Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct is available from DeepInfra.
Ember-1
Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Ember-1 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Ember-1 vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct.