Skip to main content

Model comparison

Inkling vs MiniCPM5-1B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 3 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Thinking Machines Lab
69/100
Margin
33.0pts
← winning
36/100
3 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Inkling #17; MiniCPM5-1B unranked

Evidence parity. Inkling and MiniCPM5-1B share 3 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Inkling; 11 to MiniCPM5-1B.

Updated July 15, 2026
Shared results
3
Inkling only
13
MiniCPM5-1B only
11
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. MiniCPM5-1B only becomes the better choice if you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 3 evidence categories; 3 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 36. 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 33.1. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is AIME26, 97.1% to 40.4%.

MiniCPM5-1B 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 131K for MiniCPM5-1B.

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 Inkling and MiniCPM5-1B
CategoryInklingΔMiniCPM5-1B
MathInkling97.1Margin 64.0MiniCPM5-1B33.1
Inst. FollowingInkling79.8Margin 21.3MiniCPM5-1B58.5
KnowledgeInkling51.7Margin 7.6MiniCPM5-1B44.1
AgenticInkling69.4MarginNo overlapMiniCPM5-1BNot measured
CodingInkling68.6MarginNo overlapMiniCPM5-1BNot measured
MultimodalInkling76.5MarginNo overlapMiniCPM5-1BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · InklingB · MiniCPM5-1B
  1. AIME26

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 97.1%B 40.4%
    Winner: InklingΔ 56.7
    AIME26: Inkling scored 97.1%; MiniCPM5-1B scored 40.4%. Inkling wins this benchmark.
  2. IFBench

    Inst. Following
    Source ↗
    A 79.8%B 46.7%
    Winner: InklingΔ 33.1
    IFBench: Inkling scored 79.8%; MiniCPM5-1B scored 46.7%. Inkling wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricInklingMiniCPM5-1BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensInkling$1.87 input / $4.68 outputMiniCPM5-1BNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondInklingNot availableMiniCPM5-1BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenInklingNot availableMiniCPM5-1BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensInkling1MMiniCPM5-1B131KInkling lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
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
BFCL v4Source 25.1%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.6%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 54.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 63.8%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource 22.7%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source 33.5%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
BBHSource 71.9%Not comparable
KnowledgeInkling wins
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
GPQASource 87.9%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 87.9%26.3%Inkling leads
HLESource 46%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 30%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 48.9%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource 70.1%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource 23.1%Not comparable
MathInkling wins
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
AIME26Source 97.1%40.4%Inkling leads
AIME 2025Source 40.4%Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source 25.8%Not comparable
MATH-500Source 91.6%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
MMMU-ProSource 73.5%Not comparable
CharXivSource 82%Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 78.1%Not comparable
Inst. FollowingInkling wins
BenchmarkInklingMiniCPM5-1BResult
IFBenchSource 79.8%46.7%Inkling leads
IFEvalSource 80.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Inkling or MiniCPM5-1B?

Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 36. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME26, where the scores are 97.1% and 40.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Inkling or MiniCPM5-1B?

Inkling has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 51.7 versus 44.1. Inside this category, GPQA-D is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Inkling or MiniCPM5-1B?

Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 33.1. Inside this category, AIME26 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Inkling or MiniCPM5-1B?

Inkling has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 79.8 versus 58.5. Inside this category, IFBench 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.