Agentic
Directional only- Agents-A1
- 75.5
- Inkling-Small
- 70.1
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Model comparison
Agents-A1 vs Inkling-Small
Updated July 30, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
2 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
The category averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so they are directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
4 Agents-A1 only
2 Shared
18 Inkling-Small only
- Shared results
- 2
- Agents-A1 only
- 4
- Inkling-Small only
- 18
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
2 categories use different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.
Knowledge
Directional only- Agents-A1
- 47.6
- Inkling-Small
- 53.4
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Coding
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- Not measured
- Inkling-Small
- 62.4
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 3 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- 60.2
- Inkling-Small
- 40.1
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- Not measured
- Inkling-Small
- 92.9
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- Not measured
- Inkling-Small
- Not measured
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 0 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- Not measured
- Inkling-Small
- 76.6
- Weighted basis
- 0 vs 2 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Agents-A1
- 94.8
- Inkling-Small
- 82.2
- Weighted basis
- 1 vs 1 rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Agents-A1 | Inkling-Small | Weighted basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 75.5 | 70.1 | Directional only1 vs 2 rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 47.6 | 53.4 | Directional only1 vs 2 rows | Directional only |
| Coding | Not measured | 62.4 | Not comparable0 vs 3 rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 60.2 | 40.1 | Not comparable1 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not measured | 92.9 | Not comparable0 vs 2 rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not measured | Not measured | Not comparable0 vs 0 rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not measured | 76.6 | Not comparable0 vs 2 rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | 94.8 | 82.2 | Not comparable1 vs 1 rows | Not comparable |
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
BrowseComp
Agentic
HLE
Knowledge
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Agents-A1
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0013
- Fits in one request
Agents-A1 has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Agents-A1
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Inkling-Small
- $0.03332
- Fits in one request
Agents-A1 has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Agents-A1
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0492
- Fits in one request
Agents-A1 has no comparable published API token rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationAgents-A1Inkling-Small
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Agents-A1
262K
Inkling-Small
1M
API model ID
Agents-A1
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Agents-A1
No comparable hosted API rate
Inkling-Small
$0.116 per 1M cached input tokens
Documented inputs
Agents-A1
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Agents-A1
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Provider availability
Agents-A1
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Agents-A1
Reasoning
Inkling-Small
Hybrid
Weight access
Agents-A1
Open Weight
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
License
Agents-A1
Open Weight
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
Release date
Agents-A1
2026-06-26
Inkling-Small
2026-07-30
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Inkling-Small has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence24 rows
Agentic
BrowseComp
Agents-A175.5%SourceInkling-Small77.4%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
HLE w/ tools
Agents-A147.6%SourceInkling-Small—Not directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Agents-A138.8%SourceInkling-Small—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Agents-A1—Inkling-Small64.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Agents-A1—Inkling-Small79.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Agents-A1—Inkling-Small54.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Reasoning
Knowledge
Math
Multimodal
Instruction following
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Agents-A1 or Inkling-Small?
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Agents-A1 or Inkling-Small?
The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Agents-A1 or Inkling-Small?
The current agentic tasks averages use different weighted benchmark sets, so BenchLM does not name a winner from them. Read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which costs less, Agents-A1 or Inkling-Small?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Agents-A1 or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 262K.
Related comparisons
Last updated July 30, 2026
Watch Agents-A1 vs Inkling-Small
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.