Ember-1 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched at 43.1 and 48.3 on the LLM Stats Score. Qwen3.8 Flash is 26.1x cheaper per token.

Fireworks AI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 43.1 and 48.3.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ember-1 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Qwen3.8 Flash is roughly 26.1x 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

you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
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 Qwen3.8 Flash

cost matters — it's about 26.1x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Better token value: Qwen3.8 Flash

Ember-1

Fireworks AI

Qwen3.8 Flash

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Core performance indexes

LLM Stats Score

43.1

#51 · 4 evals

48.3

#29 · 22 evals

Best

Reasoning

38.6

#71 · 3 evals

48.4

#21 · 11 evals

Best

Coding

37.0

#22 · 3 evals

Best

34.0

#37 · 6 evals

Agents

29.7

#44 · 2 evals

33.2

#31 · 11 evals

Best

Cost, coverage & limits

Benchmark wins

1 of 1

Best

0 of 1

Input price

$3.00 / M

$0.15 / M

Best

Output price

$15.00 / M

$0.47 / M

Best

Context window

1,040,000

Best

1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared

Index

Ember-1

Qwen3.8 Flash

Tool use

15.9#94 · 2 evals

29.0#15 · 2 evals

Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

4 reported for Ember-1 · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

1 shared

Ember-1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1), while Qwen3.8 Flash is better at 0 benchmarks.

Ember-1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

For input processing, Ember-1 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 20.0x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, Ember-1 ($15.00/1M tokens) is 31.9x more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash ($0.47/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Ember-1 is more expensive than Qwen3.8 Flash.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Ember-1

Input tokens$3.00

Output tokens$15.00

Best providerFireworks

Qwen3.8 Flash

Input tokens$0.15

Output tokens$0.47

Best providerNovita

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

2655.0B diff

Ember-1 has 2655.0B more parameters than Qwen3.8 Flash, making it 2124.0% larger.

Ember-1

2.8Tparameters

Qwen3.8 Flash

125.0Bparameters

2780.0B

Ember-1

125.0B

Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Ember-1 accepts 1,040,000 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8 Flash's 1,000,000 tokens. Only Qwen3.8 Flash specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

Ember-1

Input1,040,000 tokens

Output- tokens

Qwen3.8 Flash

Input1,000,000 tokens

Output131,072 tokens

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ember-1 does not.

Qwen3.8 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Ember-1

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Ember-1

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ember-1 was released on 2026-09-23, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Ember-1 is 1 month newer than Qwen3.8 Flash.

Ember-1

Sep 23, 2026

2 weeks ago

4w newer

Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Ember-1 is available from Fireworks. Qwen3.8 Flash is available from Novita.

Ember-1

Fireworks

Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Qwen3.8 Flash

Novita

Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.47/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ember-1

✓ Preferred

Qwen3.8 Flash

Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ember-1 vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, Ember-1 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 43.1 and 48.3. Ember-1 is made by Fireworks AI and Qwen3.8 Flash is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Ember-1 compare to Qwen3.8 Flash in benchmarks?

Ember-1 scores SWE-Bench Verified: 92.2%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 82.0%, DeepSWE 1.1: 75.2%, Tau2 Airline: 66.0%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

Is Ember-1 cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is 20.0x cheaper for input tokens. Ember-1 costs $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output via fireworks. Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ember-1 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.1 vs 48.3), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($3.00 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ember-1 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ember-1 is developed by Fireworks AI and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Ember-1 vs Qwen3.8 Flash