Multimodal
Like-for-like- Command A+
- 15.1
- #47/48
- Inkling-Small
- 48.8
- #39/48
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Inkling-Small leads
Command A+ vs Inkling-Small
Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Inkling-Small has the higher public score estimate, 59.25 versus 42.58, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
2 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
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
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Command A+ is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Command A+ is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Command A+ does not fit this workload in one request. Command A+ has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Confidence: rate-fallback
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
2 Command A+ only
2 Shared
23 Inkling-Small only
- Shared results
- 2
- Command A+ only
- 2
- Inkling-Small only
- 23
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 / 8
4 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Agentic
Directional only- Command A+
- 40.6
- Estimated · #114/152
- Inkling-Small
- 36.9
- Supported · #128/152
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 5 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Coding
Directional only- Command A+
- 43.4
- Estimated · #101/151
- Inkling-Small
- 43.8
- Supported · #97/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- Command A+
- 36.6
- Estimated · #150/183
- Inkling-Small
- 56.5
- Supported · #46/183
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Instruction following
Directional only- Command A+
- 90.6
- #20/123
- Inkling-Small
- 89.6
- #25/123
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Reasoning
Not comparable- Command A+
- 57.2
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Inkling-Small
- 42.7
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Command A+
- Not ranked
- Inkling-Small
- 76.9
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Command A+
- Not ranked
- Inkling-Small
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Command A+ | Inkling-Small | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | 15.1#47/48 | 48.8#39/48 | Like-for-likeProvisional lane · 2 vs 2 weighted rows | Inkling-Small leads |
| Agentic | 40.6Estimated · #114/152 | 36.9Supported · #128/152 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 1 vs 5 public rows | Directional only |
| Coding | 43.4Estimated · #101/151 | 43.8Supported · #97/151 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 6 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 36.6Estimated · #150/183 | 56.5Supported · #46/183 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 0 vs 6 public rows | Directional only |
| Instruction following | 90.6#20/123 | 89.6#25/123 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 57.2Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 42.7Unranked · 3 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | 76.9Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
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.
CharXiv
Multimodal
MMMU-Pro
Multimodal
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
- Command A+
- $0.0075
- Fits in one request
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0013
- Fits in one request
Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Command A+
- $0.155
- Fits in one request
- Inkling-Small
- $0.03332
- Fits in one request
Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Command A+
- $0.65
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
- Inkling-Small
- $0.0492
- Fits in one request
Command A+ does not fit this workload in one request. Command A+ has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationCommand A+Inkling-Small
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Command A+
128K
Inkling-Small
1M
API model ID
Command A+
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.
Command A+
Not published
Inkling-Small
$0.116 per 1M cached input tokens
Documented inputs
Command A+
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Command A+
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Provider availability
Command A+
Not sourced
Inkling-Small
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Command A+
Reasoning
Inkling-Small
Hybrid
Weight access
Command A+
Open Weight
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
License
Command A+
Open Weight
Inkling-Small
Open Weight
Release date
Command A+
2026-05-20
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
- Inkling-Small has the higher public score estimate, 59.25 versus 42.58, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.155 vs $0.03332. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.65 vs $0.0492.
- 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 evidence27 rows
Agentic
τ²-bench results
Command A+85%SourceInkling-Small—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Command A+—Inkling-Small64.7%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Command A+—Inkling-Small77.4%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Command A+—Inkling-Small79.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
Command A+—Inkling-Small54.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Command A+—Inkling-Small55.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Command A+—Inkling-Small80.2%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Command A+—Inkling-Small55.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Command A+—Inkling-Small64.7%SourceNot directly comparable
SciCode
Command A+—Inkling-Small48.7%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Command A+—Inkling-Small85.9%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
Command A+—Inkling-Small82.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
GPQA
Command A+—Inkling-Small89.5%SourceNot directly comparable
GPQA-D
Command A+—Inkling-Small89.5%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE
Command A+—Inkling-Small47.8%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Command A+—Inkling-Small31.6%SourceNot directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Command A+—Inkling-Small83.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Command A+—Inkling-Small85.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Math
Multimodal
MMMU
Command A+75.1%SourceInkling-Small—Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Command A+63%SourceInkling-Small74%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
CharXiv
Command A+52.7%SourceInkling-Small81.3%SourceInkling-Small leads this result
CharXiv w/o tools
Command A+—Inkling-Small77.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Command A+—Inkling-Small82.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Command A+ or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small has the higher public score estimate, 59.25 versus 42.58, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, Command A+ or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small scores higher for coding on the public lane, 43.8 to 43.4. Command A+ is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Command A+ or Inkling-Small?
Command A+ scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 40.6 to 36.9. Command A+ is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which costs less, Command A+ or Inkling-Small?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0075 on Command A+ and $0.0013 on Inkling-Small; repository review costs $0.155 and $0.03332; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.65 and $0.0492. Command A+ does not fit this workload in one request. Command A+ has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.
Which has the larger context window, Command A+ or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 128K.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 10, 2026
Watch Command A+ 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.