The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ember-1 vs QwQ-32B

Ember-1 leads the LLM Stats Score 43.1 to 14.7.

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

Which is better?

Ember-1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.1 to 14.7, ranking #51 overall.

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 and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose QwQ-32B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
43.1
#51
14.7
#248
38.6
#71
15.5
#239
37.0
#22
10.2
#178
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$3.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,040,000
—

Individual benchmarks

4 reported for Ember-1 · 7 for QwQ-32B

No common benchmarks found

Ember-1 and QwQ-32Bdon'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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

2747.5B diff

Ember-1 has 2747.5B more parameters than QwQ-32B, making it 8453.8% larger.

Fireworks AI
Ember-1
2.8Tparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
32.5Bparameters
2780.0B
Ember-1
32.5B
QwQ-32B

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Ember-1 specifies input context (1,040,000 tokens).

Fireworks AI
Ember-1
Input1,040,000 tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
QwQ-32B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Ember-1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while QwQ-32B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Ember-1

Proprietary

Closed source

QwQ-32B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ember-1 was released on 2026-09-23, while QwQ-32B was released on 2025-03-05.

Ember-1 is 19 months newer than QwQ-32B.

Ember-1

Sep 23, 2026

2 weeks ago

1.6yr newer
QwQ-32B

Mar 5, 2025

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

QwQ-32B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-28, while Ember-1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm QwQ-32B's training data extends to 2024-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ember-1's cutoff date.

Ember-1

—

QwQ-32B

Nov 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Ember-1 and QwQ-32B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ember-1
✓ Preferred
QwQ-32B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ember-1 vs QwQ-32B.

Which is better, Ember-1 or QwQ-32B?

Ember-1 leads the LLM Stats Score 43.1 to 14.7. Ember-1 is made by Fireworks AI and QwQ-32B 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 QwQ-32B 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%. QwQ-32B scores MATH-500: 90.6%, IFEval: 83.9%, AIME 2024: 79.5%, LiveBench: 73.1%, BFCL: 66.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Ember-1 and QwQ-32B?

Ember-1 supports 1.0M tokens and QwQ-32B supports an unknown number of 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 QwQ-32B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.1 vs 14.7), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ember-1 and QwQ-32B?

Ember-1 is developed by Fireworks AI and QwQ-32B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.