Model comparison
Inkling vs Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Inkling #20 (Supported); Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) #66 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Inkling and Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 32 results are unique to Inkling; 2 to Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Inkling only
- 32
- Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 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 BenchAlign aggregate, 67.54 to 58.01. 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 6.4.
Inkling is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.87 input / $4.68 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning). That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) 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 128K for Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning).
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Inkling | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)$0 input / $0 output | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | InklingNot available | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | InklingNot available | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Inkling1M | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)128K | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | 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 | 1257 | — | 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 |
Coding5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | 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% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.2% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 29.7% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 2.1% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 40.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 63.1% | — | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchSource | 79.8% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Inkling or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 67.54 to 58.01.
Which is better for math, Inkling or Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning)?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 6.4. Qwen3 235B 2507 (Reasoning) stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.