Skip to main content

Model comparison

Grok Code Fast 1 vs Inkling

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

38.56/100
Margin
30.4pts
winning →
Thinking Machines Lab
69/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Grok Code Fast 1 unranked; Inkling #17

BenchAlign evidence: Grok Code Fast 1 supported; Inkling not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Grok Code Fast 1 and Inkling share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to Grok Code Fast 1; 15 to Inkling.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
1
Grok Code Fast 1 only
12
Inkling only
15
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok Code Fast 1 only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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, 69 to 41. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Inkling is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.20 input / $1.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok Code Fast 1. That is roughly 3.1x on output cost alone. Inkling is the reasoning model in the pair, while Grok Code Fast 1 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 256K for Grok Code Fast 1.

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 scores and score margins for Grok Code Fast 1 and Inkling
CategoryGrok Code Fast 1ΔInkling
CodingGrok Code Fast 170.8Margin 2.2Inkling68.6
AgenticGrok Code Fast 1Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling69.4
KnowledgeGrok Code Fast 1Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling51.7
MathGrok Code Fast 1Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling97.1
MultimodalGrok Code Fast 1Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling76.5
Inst. FollowingGrok Code Fast 1Not measuredMarginNo overlapInkling79.8

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Grok Code Fast 1B · Inkling
  1. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 70.8%B 77.6%
    Winner: InklingΔ 6.8
    SWE-bench Verified: Grok Code Fast 1 scored 70.8%; Inkling scored 77.6%. Inkling wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGrok Code Fast 1InklingComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGrok Code Fast 1$0.2 input / $1.5 outputInkling$1.87 input / $4.68 outputGrok Code Fast 1 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGrok Code Fast 1172 tok/sInklingNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGrok Code Fast 12.81 sInklingNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGrok Code Fast 1256KInkling1MInkling lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 75.7%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 1258Not comparable
CodingGrok Code Fast 1 wins
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 70.8%77.6%Inkling leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 17.4%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 36.2%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 54.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
AA-LCRSource 48.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 21.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 72.7%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 7.5%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -36.0%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 23.8%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 78.5%Not comparable
GPQASource 87.9%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.9%Not comparable
HLESource 46%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 30%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
AIME26Source 97.1%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
MMMU-ProSource 73.5%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82%Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 78.1%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGrok Code Fast 1InklingResult
AA-IFBenchSource 41.4%Not comparable
IFBenchSource 79.8%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Grok Code Fast 1 or Inkling?

Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 41. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 70.8% and 77.6%.

Which is better for coding, Grok Code Fast 1 or Inkling?

Grok Code Fast 1 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.8 versus 68.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 15, 2026

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.