Model comparison
GPT-5.6 Terra vs Inkling
Head-to-head evidence from 7 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: GPT-5.6 Terra unranked; Inkling #17
BenchAlign evidence: GPT-5.6 Terra estimated; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-5.6 Terra and Inkling share 7 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 36 results are unique to GPT-5.6 Terra; 9 to Inkling.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 7
- GPT-5.6 Terra only
- 36
- Inkling only
- 9
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick GPT-5.6 Terra if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Inkling only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 7 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-5.6 Terra is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 84 to 69. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-5.6 Terra's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 92.9 against 51.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 87.4% to 63.8%. Inkling does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-5.6 Terra is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 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. GPT-5.6 Terra 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 | GPT-5.6 Terra | Δ | Inkling |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | GPT-5.6 Terra92.9 | Margin← 41.2 | Inkling51.7 |
| Agentic | GPT-5.6 Terra87.4 | Margin← 18.0 | Inkling69.4 |
| Math | GPT-5.6 Terra80.8 | Margin→ 16.3 | Inkling97.1 |
| Coding | GPT-5.6 Terra63.4 | Margin→ 5.2 | Inkling68.6 |
| Multimodal | GPT-5.6 Terra80.7 | Margin← 4.2 | Inkling76.5 |
| Inst. Following | GPT-5.6 TerraNot 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 87.4%B 63.8%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 23.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 87.4%; Inkling scored 63.8%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 87.5%B 77.1%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 10.4BrowseComp: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 87.5%; Inkling scored 77.1%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 63.4%B 54.3%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 9.1SWE-bench Pro: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 63.4%; Inkling scored 54.3%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 80.7%B 73.5%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 7.2MMMU-Pro: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 80.7%; Inkling scored 73.5%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 92.9%B 87.9%Winner: GPT-5.6 TerraΔ 5GPQA: GPT-5.6 Terra scored 92.9%; Inkling scored 87.9%. GPT-5.6 Terra wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra | Inkling | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra$2.5 input / $15 output | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Inkling has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | InklingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-5.6 TerraNot available | InklingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-5.6 Terra1M | Inkling1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Terra wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | 63.8% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 87.5% | 77.1% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 50.2% | — | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | 81.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | 23.2% | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | 53.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 47.4% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 86.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 54.6% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1593 | — | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | 2.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | 51.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 31.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | 45.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | — | 74.1% | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | — | 1258 | Not comparable |
CodingInkling wins10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench ProSource | 63.4% | 54.3% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 87.4% | 63.8% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| deepSweSource | 69.6% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 55.8% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 64.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 76.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | 57.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 53.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | 88.0% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 77.6% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Terra wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-5.6 Terra | Inkling | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 92.9% | 87.9% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| GPQA-DSource | 92.9% | 87.9% | GPT-5.6 Terra leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 57.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | 32.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 55.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 41.8% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -0.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 85.2% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 46% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 30% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins4 benchmarks
MultimodalGPT-5.6 Terra wins5 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
GPT-5.6 Terra is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 84 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 87.4% and 63.8%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 51.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.6 versus 63.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 80.8. GPT-5.6 Terra stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.4 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, GPT-5.6 Terra or Inkling?
GPT-5.6 Terra has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.7 versus 76.5. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro 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.