Model comparison
Inkling vs LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract
Head-to-head evidence from 10 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Inkling #17; LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract unranked
Evidence parity. Inkling and LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract share 10 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to Inkling; 6 to LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 10
- Inkling only
- 22
- LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract only
- 6
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Inkling and LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 10 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Inkling has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract.
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 | Inkling | Δ | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Inkling69.4 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
| Coding | Inkling68.6 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
| Knowledge | Inkling51.7 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
| Math | Inkling97.1 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
| Multimodal | Inkling76.5 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Inkling79.8 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | InklingNot available | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | InklingNot available | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-ExtractNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Inkling1M | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract128K | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 8.5% | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 46.1% | 3.0% | Inkling leads |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 46% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 30% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.7% | 1.0% | Inkling leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.2% | 28.9% | Inkling leads |
| AA-HLESource | 29.7% | 5.1% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 2.1% | -83.9% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.0% | 5.2% | Inkling leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 63.1% | 94.0% | Inkling leads |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 97.1% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 73.5% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 82% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 78.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 73.5% | 26.5% | Inkling leads |
| Liquid Extract JSON ValiditySource | — | 99.6% | Not comparable |
| Liquid Extract F1Source | — | 99.6% | Not comparable |
| Liquid Extract VLM JudgeSource | — | 90.6% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Inkling and LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Inkling and LFM2.5-VL-1.6B-Extract today?
Inkling: $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
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.