Model comparison
GLM-4.6 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: GLM-4.6 unranked; Inkling #17
BenchAlign evidence: GLM-4.6 supported; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GLM-4.6 and Inkling share 9 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to GLM-4.6; 23 to Inkling.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- GLM-4.6 only
- 6
- Inkling only
- 23
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GLM-4.6 only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 9 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 1 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, 72 to 45. 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 3.4.
GLM-4.6 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. Inkling gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for GLM-4.6.
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 | GLM-4.6 | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GLM-4.63.4 | Margin→ 93.7 | Inkling97.1 |
| Agentic | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling69.4 |
| Coding | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling68.6 |
| Knowledge | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling51.7 |
| Multimodal | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling76.5 |
| Inst. Following | GLM-4.6Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Inkling79.8 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GLM-4.6 | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GLM-4.6Not available | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GLM-4.6Not available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GLM-4.6Not available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GLM-4.6200K | Inkling1M | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 76.9% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 77.1% | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | — | 1258 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 32.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 36.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1239 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 836 | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 23.7% | Not comparable |
Coding7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe Code BenchSource | 3.09% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 28.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 33.1% | 46.1% | Inkling leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.6% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 54.3% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 52.1% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 23.0% | 40.7% | Inkling leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 63.2% | 87.2% | Inkling leads |
| AA-HLESource | 5.2% | 29.7% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -31.6% | 2.1% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 20.8% | 40.0% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 66.1% | 63.1% | Inkling leads |
| GPQASource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 87.9% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 46% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 30% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GLM-4.6 or Inkling?
Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 72 to 45.
Which is better for math, GLM-4.6 or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 3.4. GLM-4.6 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.