Model comparison
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) vs Inkling
Head-to-head evidence from 9 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) #9; Inkling #17
Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) and Inkling share 9 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 33 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max); 7 to Inkling.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) only
- 33
- Inkling only
- 7
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Inkling only becomes the better choice if mathematics 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 9 shared benchmark results across 3 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
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 77 to 69. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)'s sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 60.4 against 51.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 37.7% to 46%. Inkling does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Inkling is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.43 input / $0.87 output per 1M tokens for DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max). That is roughly 5.4x on output cost alone. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) 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 | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)60.4 | Margin← 8.7 | Inkling51.7 |
| Agentic | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)74.5 | Margin← 5.1 | Inkling69.4 |
| Coding | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)70.9 | Margin← 2.3 | Inkling68.6 |
| Math | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)95.2 | Margin→ 1.9 | Inkling97.1 |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling76.5 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling79.8 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 37.7%B 46%Winner: InklingΔ 8.3HLE: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 37.7%; Inkling scored 46%. Inkling wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 83.4%B 77.1%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 6.3BrowseComp: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 83.4%; Inkling scored 77.1%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 67.9%B 63.8%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 4.1Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 67.9%; Inkling scored 63.8%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Verified
CodingA 80.6%B 77.6%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 3SWE-bench Verified: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 80.6%; Inkling scored 77.6%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 90.1%B 87.9%Winner: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Δ 2.2GPQA: DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) scored 90.1%; Inkling scored 87.9%. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)$0.435 input / $0.87 output | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)Not available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max)1M | Inkling1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | 63.8% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 83.4% | 77.1% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 48.2% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 73.6% | 74.1% | Inkling leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1307 | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 51.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 36.4% | — | Not comparable |
| APEX-Agents-AASource | 24.3% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 96.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 40.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | — | 1258 | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench Pass@1-COTSource | 93.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CodeforcesSource | 3206.0 | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 80.6% | 77.6% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 55.4% | 54.3% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 76.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 67.9% | 63.8% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 49.93% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 59.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 46.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 50.0% | — | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SimpleQASource | 57.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Chinese-SimpleQASource | 84.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 90.1% | 87.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 90.1% | 87.9% | DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) leads |
| HLESource | 37.7% | 46% | Inkling leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 44.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 88.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 35.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -10.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 43.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 94.0% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 30% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Inkling?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 77 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 37.7% and 46%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Inkling?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.4 versus 51.7. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Inkling?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.9 versus 68.6. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 95.2. DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) or Inkling?
DeepSeek V4 Pro (Max) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 69.4. Inside this category, BrowseComp is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.