WritingmateWritingmate
Model Comparison

Ember-1 vs Sonar Pro SearchWhich Is Better in 2026?

Fireworks•Perplexity: Sonar Pro Search logoPerplexity

Ember-1 vs Sonar Pro Search: which should you choose in 2026?

Ember-1 (by Fireworks) and Sonar Pro Search (by Perplexity) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.

Their blended API prices are effectively the same.

Ember-1 has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 200,000 tokens).

Choose Ember-1 if…

  • • you work with longer documents, transcripts, or codebases

Choose Sonar Pro Search if…

  • • your own prompt tests favor its output; shared comparable evidence does not identify a unique advantage

The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.

Chat with both models
vs

Performance benchmarks

Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.

Ember-1 and Sonar Pro Search benchmark results
BenchmarkEmber-1Sonar Pro Search
AutomationBench-AA

A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework.

Guardrail-aware score

——
BrowseComp

A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing.

Accuracy

——
OSWorld-Verified

A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state.

Mean task reward

——
SWE-Bench Verified

A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests.

Resolved

——
Terminal-Bench 2.1

Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol.

Mean task success

——
AutoBench

A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench.

Weighted peer-assessment score

——
GPQA Diamond

The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry.

Accuracy

——
Humanity's Last Exam

A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged.

Accuracy

——

Benchmark sources

    Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09.

    Pricing, capabilities, and model facts

    Ember-1 and Sonar Pro Search model facts
    FeatureEmber-1Sonar Pro Search
    Context & model facts
    DeveloperFireworksPerplexity
    API providerFireworksPerplexity
    Input context1,048,576 tokens200,000 tokens
    Maximum output943,718 tokens8,000 tokens
    Released——
    Added to WritingmateSep 24, 2026Oct 30, 2025
    LicenseNot availableNot available
    Knowledge cutoff——
    Capabilities
    InputsText, ImageText, Image
    OutputsTextText
    Provider endpoint accepts tool parametersYesNo
    ReasoningYesYes
    VisionYesYes
    Image GenerationNoNo
    Video GenerationNoNo
    API pricing
    Input (per 1M tokens)$3.00$3.00
    Output (per 1M tokens)$15.00$15.00
    Blended 3:1 input/output$6.00$6.00
    API performance
    p95 latencyNot measuredNot measured
    Output throughputNot measuredNot measured
    Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table.

    Data sources

    • Writingmate model catalog (pricing, limits, and availability)

    Catalog data last updated Sep 24, 2026.

    Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?

    Comparing Ember-1 from Fireworks with Sonar Pro Search from Perplexity? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.

    Subscription-plan access for Ember-1 and Sonar Pro Search
    PlanPriceEmber-1Sonar Pro SearchAI ImagesAI Video
    Writingmate Pro
    Most popular
    		$20/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreVEO 3.1, Kling 3.0
    Writingmate Ultimate
    Power users
    		$60/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreVEO 3.1, Kling 3.0
    View Plans & Pricing

    Ember-1 vs Sonar Pro Search FAQ

    Which is better, Ember-1 or Sonar Pro Search?

    There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader. Their blended API prices are effectively the same. Ember-1 has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 200,000 tokens).

    Which model is cheaper to use through an API?

    Their blended API prices are effectively the same.

    Which model supports more context?

    Ember-1 has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 200,000 tokens).

    Can I switch between Ember-1 and Sonar Pro Search?

    Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.