Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Inkling
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude 3.5 Sonnet unranked; Inkling #17
BenchAlign evidence: Claude 3.5 Sonnet estimated; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Inkling share 2 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 3.5 Sonnet; 14 to Inkling.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude 3.5 Sonnet only
- 2
- Inkling only
- 14
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Claude 3.5 Sonnet only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Inkling is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 69 to 39. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Inkling's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 1.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 49% to 77.6%. Claude 3.5 Sonnet does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens for Inkling. That is roughly 3.2x on output cost alone. Inkling is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude 3.5 Sonnet is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Inkling gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Claude 3.5 Sonnet1.6 | Margin→ 95.5 | Inkling97.1 |
| Coding | Claude 3.5 Sonnet49.0 | Margin→ 19.6 | Inkling68.6 |
| Knowledge | Claude 3.5 Sonnet59.4 | Margin← 7.7 | Inkling51.7 |
| Agentic | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling69.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling76.5 |
| Inst. Following | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling79.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 49%B 77.6%Winner: InklingΔ 28.6SWE-bench Verified: Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 49%; Inkling scored 77.6%. Inkling wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 59.4%B 87.9%Winner: InklingΔ 28.5GPQA: Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 59.4%; Inkling scored 87.9%. Inkling wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 3.5 Sonnet$3 input / $15 output | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Inkling has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 3.5 SonnetNot available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 3.5 Sonnet200K | Inkling1M | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
CodingInkling wins3 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude 3.5 Sonnet wins4 benchmarks
MathInkling wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchSource | — | 79.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Inkling?
Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 39. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 49% and 77.6%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Inkling?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 51.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.6 versus 49. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 1.6. Claude 3.5 Sonnet stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.