Model comparison
Inkling vs Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)
Head-to-head evidence from 3 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Inkling #17; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) unranked
BenchAlign evidence: Inkling not scored; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Inkling and Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) share 3 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 13 results are unique to Inkling; 19 to Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 3
- Inkling only
- 13
- Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only
- 19
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Inkling if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 3 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Inkling finishes one point ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 68. That is enough to call, but not enough to treat as a blowout. This matchup comes down to a few meaningful edges rather than one model dominating the board.
Inkling's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 97.1 against 18.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Pro, 54.3% to 57.3%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) 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 256K for Qwen 3.6 Max (preview).
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 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | Inkling97.1 | Margin← 78.7 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)18.4 |
| Knowledge | Inkling51.7 | Margin→ 22.2 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)73.9 |
| Coding | Inkling68.6 | Margin← 17.6 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)51.0 |
| Agentic | Inkling69.4 | Margin← 4.0 | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)65.4 |
| Multimodal | Inkling76.5 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Inkling79.8 | MarginNo overlap | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 54.3%B 57.3%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 3SWE-bench Pro: Inkling scored 54.3%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 57.3%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 63.8%B 65.4%Winner: Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Δ 1.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Inkling scored 63.8%; Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) scored 65.4%. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Inkling | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | InklingNot available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | InklingNot available | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Inkling1M | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)256K | Inkling lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticInkling wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 65.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 74.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | 1258 | — | Not comparable |
| QwenClawBenchSource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| QwenWebBenchSource | — | 1532 | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 95.9% | Not comparable |
CodingInkling wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 77.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.3% | 57.3% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 65.4% | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) leads |
| SciCodeSource | — | 47% | Not comparable |
| NL2RepoSource | — | 42.9% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 43.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 46.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeQwen 3.6 Max (preview) wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 46% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 30% | — | Not comparable |
| SuperGPQASource | — | 73.9% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 40.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 88.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 28.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 10.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 37.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 44.2% | Not comparable |
MathInkling wins3 benchmarks
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Inkling or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Inkling is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 69 to 68. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Pro, where the scores are 54.3% and 57.3%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Inkling or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 73.9 versus 51.7. Inkling stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for coding, Inkling or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Inkling has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.6 versus 51. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Inkling or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Inkling has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.1 versus 18.4. Qwen 3.6 Max (preview) stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Inkling or Qwen 3.6 Max (preview)?
Inkling has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 69.4 versus 65.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
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.