Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Inkling
Head-to-head evidence from 9 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 5 unranked; Inkling #17
BenchAlign evidence: Claude Sonnet 5 estimated; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Sonnet 5 and Inkling share 9 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 27 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 5; 7 to Inkling.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- Claude Sonnet 5 only
- 27
- Inkling only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Claude Sonnet 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Inkling only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 9 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Sonnet 5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 85 to 69. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 5's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 81.9 against 69.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 80.4% to 63.8%.
Claude Sonnet 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens for Inkling. That is roughly 2.1x on output cost alone. Claude Sonnet 5 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Inkling 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.
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 Sonnet 5 | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 581.9 | Margin← 12.5 | Inkling69.4 |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 588.3 | Margin← 11.8 | Inkling76.5 |
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 576.7 | Margin← 8.1 | Inkling68.6 |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 557.4 | Margin← 5.7 | Inkling51.7 |
| Math | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling97.1 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Sonnet 5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling79.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 80.4%B 63.8%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 16.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 80.4%; Inkling scored 63.8%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 57.4%B 46%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 11.4HLE: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 57.4%; Inkling scored 46%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 63.2%B 54.3%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 8.9SWE-bench Pro: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 63.2%; Inkling scored 54.3%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 84.7%B 77.1%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 7.6BrowseComp: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 84.7%; Inkling scored 77.1%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 85.2%B 77.6%Winner: Claude Sonnet 5Δ 7.6SWE-bench Verified: Claude Sonnet 5 scored 85.2%; Inkling scored 77.6%. Claude Sonnet 5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 5$2 input / $10 output | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Inkling has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 5Not available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 51M | Inkling1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticClaude Sonnet 5 wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | 63.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 84.7% | 77.1% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 57.4% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 81.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1607 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 46.7% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 55.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1388 | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 39.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | 44.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 5.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 28.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | — | 1258 | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Sonnet 5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 85.2% | 77.6% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.2% | 54.3% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 78.3% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 28.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 80.4% | 63.8% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| FrontierCodeSource | 42.7% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 61.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 71.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | 80.5% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 5 wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 57.4% | 46% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 43.2% | 30% | Claude Sonnet 5 leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 53.4% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 91.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 39.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 38.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 37.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | — | 97.1% | Not comparable |
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 5 wins5 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchSource | — | 79.8% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 5 or Inkling?
Claude Sonnet 5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 85 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 80.4% and 63.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Inkling?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 57.4 versus 51.7. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 5 or Inkling?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.7 versus 68.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Inkling?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.9 versus 69.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Sonnet 5 or Inkling?
Claude Sonnet 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 88.3 versus 76.5. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.