GPT-6 Astra vs Inkling-Small

Updated October 17, 2026. Rank says GPT-6 Astra is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Decision reading

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 83.88 versus 53.5, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. 8 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A

GPT-6 Astra

OpenAI

83.88/100

Supported · Public rank #3

90% interval 79.4–88.3

Model B

Inkling-Small

Thinking Machines Lab

53.5/100

Supported · Public rank #77

90% interval 45.0–61.9

Shared results: 8
GPT-6 Astra only: 32
Inkling-Small only: 20
Like-for-like categories: 3 / 8

Supported: GPT-6 Astra and Inkling-SmallHow the comparison works

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.

Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 75.5 to 37.7, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Confidence: limited
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra has the higher public agentic point estimate, 74.8 to 36.8, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
GPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra has the larger documented context window.
Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

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
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K 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
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

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

Pick the job you would use them for

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

75.5GPT-6 Astra37.7Inkling-Small

Like-for-like · BenchAlign v5.8

GPT-6 Astra has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Open the coding leaderboard Shortlist models for this job

Same basis rules as the category table below

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.

FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Math
Normalized gap 80.5
GPT-6 Astra:97.600%
Inkling-Small:17.073%
GPT-6 Astra source Inkling-Small source
ARC-AGI-2Reasoning
Normalized gap 54.9
GPT-6 Astra:95%
Inkling-Small:40.1%
GPT-6 Astra source Inkling-Small source
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Math
Normalized gap 47.4
GPT-6 Astra:93.684%
Inkling-Small:46.316%
Shared source
BrowseCompAgentic
Normalized gap 14.1
GPT-6 Astra:91.5%
Inkling-Small:77.4%
GPT-6 Astra source Inkling-Small source
GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 6.5
GPT-6 Astra:96%
Inkling-Small:89.5%
GPT-6 Astra source Inkling-Small source

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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

Like-for-like

GPT-6 Astra: 74.8; Supported · #7/128
Inkling-Small: 36.8; Supported · #77/128
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 14 vs 5 public rows
Reading: GPT-6 Astra leads

Coding

Like-for-like

GPT-6 Astra: 75.5; Supported · #4/150
Inkling-Small: 37.7; Supported · #71/150
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 6 public rows
Reading: GPT-6 Astra leads

Knowledge

Like-for-like

GPT-6 Astra: 86.2; Supported · #3/184
Inkling-Small: 55.1; Supported · #59/184
Basis: BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 6 public rows
Reading: GPT-6 Astra leads

Reasoning

Not comparable

GPT-6 Astra: 93.3; #1/28
Inkling-Small: 55.0; Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Basis: Provisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable

GPT-6 Astra: 87.3; Unranked · 3 rankable rows
Inkling-Small: 67.5; #36/54
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable

GPT-6 Astra: Not ranked
Inkling-Small: Not ranked
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable

GPT-6 Astra: Not ranked
Inkling-Small: 93.3; #9/148
Basis: Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Math

Not comparable

GPT-6 Astra: 97.3; Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Inkling-Small: 69.8; #5/12
Basis: Provisional lane · 2 vs 4 weighted rows
Reading: Not comparable

Category scores with the server-provided evidence basis for GPT-6 Astra and Inkling-Small
Category	GPT-6 Astra	Inkling-Small	Basis	Reading
Agentic	74.8Supported · #7/128	36.8Supported · #77/128	Like-for-likeBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 14 vs 5 public rows	GPT-6 Astra leads
Coding	75.5Supported · #4/150	37.7Supported · #71/150	Like-for-likeBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 6 public rows	GPT-6 Astra leads
Knowledge	86.2Supported · #3/184	55.1Supported · #59/184	Like-for-likeBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 7 vs 6 public rows	GPT-6 Astra leads
Reasoning	93.3#1/28	55.0Unranked · 4 rankable rows	Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Multimodal	87.3Unranked · 3 rankable rows	67.5#36/54	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
Instruction following	Not ranked	93.3#9/148	Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows	Not comparable
Math	97.3Unranked · 2 rankable rows	69.8#5/12	Not comparableProvisional lane · 2 vs 4 weighted rows	Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

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

GPT-6 Astra: $0.035; 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

GPT-6 Astra: $0.65; 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

GPT-6 Astra: $0.9; Fits in one request
Inkling-Small: $0.0492; Fits in one request

Inkling-Small has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

SpecificationGPT-6 AstraInkling-Small

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

GPT-6 Astra

1.05M

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

Inkling-Small

API model ID

GPT-6 Astra

gpt-6-astra

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

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.

GPT-6 Astra

$1 per 1M cached input tokens

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

Inkling-Small

$0.116 per 1M cached input tokens

Documented inputs

GPT-6 Astra

text, image

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

Inkling-Small

Not sourced

Documented outputs

GPT-6 Astra

text

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

Inkling-Small

Not sourced

Provider availability

GPT-6 Astra

Limited Availability · OpenAI Responses API, OpenAI Chat Completions API, ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, and Enterprise, Microsoft Azure, AWS Bedrock

OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model documentation

Inkling-Small

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

GPT-6 Astra

Reasoning

Inkling-Small

Hybrid

Weight access

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

Inkling-Small

Open Weight

License

GPT-6 Astra

Proprietary

Inkling-Small

Open Weight

Release date

GPT-6 Astra

2026-09-03

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: GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 83.88 versus 53.5, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost: Repository review: $0.65 vs $0.03332. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.9 vs $0.0492.
Context tradeoff: GPT-6 Astra has the larger documented window (1.05M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public score, 83.88 versus 53.5, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public coding point estimate, 75.5 to 37.7, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

GPT-6 Astra has the higher public agentic tasks point estimate, 74.8 to 36.8, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which costs less, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.035 on GPT-6 Astra and $0.0013 on Inkling-Small; repository review costs $0.65 and $0.03332; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.9 and $0.0492. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Which has the larger context window, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

GPT-6 Astra has the larger documented context window: 1.05M, compared with 1M.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence60 rows

Agentic

BrowseComp
GPT-6 Astra91.5%
Source
Inkling-Small77.4%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
OSWorld 2.0
GPT-6 Astra72.6%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 4.0
GPT-6 Astra57.90%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1
GPT-6 Astra64.6%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
ExploitGym
GPT-6 Astra42.4%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
GPT-6 Astra59.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
AutomationBench
GPT-6 Astra41.4%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
GPT-6 Astra57.2%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
GPT-6 Astra87.3%
Source
Inkling-Small55.1%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
ApprenticeBench
GPT-6 Astra68%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
CWE-bench v1
GPT-6 Astra68.0%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Hermes Index
GPT-6 Astra56.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Hermes Bench
GPT-6 Astra73.7%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
MazeBench
GPT-6 Astra23%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small64.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
MCP Atlas
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small79.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
Toolathlon-Verified
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small54.4%
Source
Not directly comparable

Coding

DeepSWE
GPT-6 Astra74.1%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 Main
GPT-6 Astra53.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
FrontierCode 1.1 Extended
GPT-6 Astra64.5%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
FrontierSWE v2
GPT-6 Astra65.5%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
PostTrainBench v1.1
GPT-6 Astra44.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
Bug Hunt Bench
GPT-6 Astra45.0 fixes
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Verified
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small80.2%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small55.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small64.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
SciCode
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small48.7%
Source
Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small85.9%
Source
Not directly comparable
SWE-bench (Vals)
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small82.2%
Source
Not directly comparable

Reasoning

STEMBench
GPT-6 Astra2.81
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
ARC-AGI-1
GPT-6 Astra98.50%
Source
Inkling-Small84.00%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
ARC-AGI-2
GPT-6 Astra95%
Source
Inkling-Small40.1%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
ARC-AGI-3
GPT-6 Astra62.7%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
GeneBench-Pro
GPT-6 Astra37.8%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
MRCR v2 256K-512K
GPT-6 Astra100.0%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
MRCR v2 512K-1M
GPT-6 Astra96.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M
GPT-6 Astra71.8%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
CritPt
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small8.3%
Source
Not directly comparable

Multimodal

ScreenSpot Pro
GPT-6 Astra92.7%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)
GPT-6 Astra0.959
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small74%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small81.3%
Source
Not directly comparable
CharXiv w/o tools
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small77.4%
Source
Not directly comparable

Knowledge

GPQA
GPT-6 Astra96%
Source
Inkling-Small89.5%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
GPQA-D
GPT-6 Astra96.0%
Source
Inkling-Small89.5%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
HealthBench (raw)
GPT-6 Astra56.9%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HealthBench (length-adjusted)
GPT-6 Astra58.3%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HealthBench Professional
GPT-6 Astra64.7%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HealthBench Professional (raw)
GPT-6 Astra68.2%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HealthBench Hard
GPT-6 Astra36.6%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
HLE
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small47.8%
Source
Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small31.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small83.6%
Source
Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small85.6%
Source
Not directly comparable

Instruction following

Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)
GPT-6 Astra8.5%
Source
Inkling-Small—
Not directly comparable
IFBench
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small82.2%
Source
Not directly comparable

Math

FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)
GPT-6 Astra97.600%
Source
Inkling-Small17.073%
Source
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Shared source
GPT-6 Astra93.684%
Inkling-Small46.316%
GPT-6 Astra leads this result
AIME26
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small95.5%
Source
Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
GPT-6 Astra—
Inkling-Small90.2%
Source
Not directly comparable

60 public results · 8 shared

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Watch GPT-6 Astra vs Inkling-Small

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,600+ readers.

Last updated October 17, 2026

GPT-6 Astra vs Inkling-Small

Decision reading

Which one for your work

Coding work

Agentic work

Long documents

Chat turn cost

Cache-heavy agent loop cost

Repository review cost

Which one for a specific job

What is actually comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Category results, on a stated basis

Agentic

Coding

Knowledge

Reasoning

Multimodal

Multilingual

Instruction following

Math

What each workload costs

Chat turn

Repository review

Cache-heavy agent loop

Specification differences

Context window

API model ID

Cached-input rate

Documented inputs

Documented outputs

Provider availability

Reasoning profile

Weight access

License

Release date

If you already use one of these models

Questions

Which is better, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

Which is better for coding, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

Which is better for agentic tasks, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

Which costs less, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

Which has the larger context window, GPT-6 Astra or Inkling-Small?

Benchmark evidence

Agentic

Coding

Reasoning

Multimodal

Knowledge

Instruction following

Math

Related comparisons

Watch GPT-6 Astra vs Inkling-Small