Capability
66.9/100
field median 57.7
#24 of 217 ranked models
Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.
Start free briefReleased Jul 15, 2026 — see all recent releases
Data as of August 13, 2026 · How the score is built
Instruction Following ranks #10. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
15 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Coding is its lowest eligible category at #104.
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
66.9/100
field median 57.7
#24 of 217 ranked models
Price
$1.87input / $4.68 output
input median $1
cached $0.37 · blended $3.27
Speed
76tok/s
field median 93 tok/s
First token 28.3 s
Context
1Mtokens
field median 200,000
Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Inkling category percentile values
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.
Estimate VRAM from known parametersScores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #66 of 129Percentile 49thWeight 22%3 benchmarksVerified | 48.2 | #66 of 129 | 49th | 22% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #104 of 134Percentile 23rdWeight 20%3 benchmarksVerified | 42.9 | #104 of 134 | 23rd | 20% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeRank #28 of 55Percentile 50thWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified | 69.1 | #28 of 55 | 50th | 12% | 4 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 78.6 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalRank #25 of 33Percentile 25thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 51.1 | #25 of 33 | 25th | 12% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| Inst. FollowingRank #10 of 38Percentile 76thWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 90.9 | #10 of 38 | 76th | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score77.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap18.4 behind | WeightWeighted 16% | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench Pro | Score54.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 80.3% | Gap26 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score63.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap28.1 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | Score63.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9% | Gap28.1 behind | WeightWeighted 38% | Provider exact |
| BrowseComp | Score77.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2% | Gap15.1 behind | WeightWeighted 28% | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score74.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap14 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score46% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7% | Gap18.7 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | Provider exact |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score87.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap7.6 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score87.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5% | Gap7.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without tools | Score30% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 59% | Gap29 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26AIME 2026 | Score97.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2% | Gap2.1 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | Score73.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.4 Pro · 94% | Gap20.5 behind | WeightWeighted 45% | Provider exact |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score82% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 93.5% | Gap11.5 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| CharXiv w/o toolsCharXiv Reasoning without tools | Score78.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 88.9% | Gap10.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchInstruction Following Benchmark | Score79.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MAI-Thinking-1 · 85% | Gap5.2 behind | WeightWeighted 65% | Provider exact |
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Jul 15, 2026 · you are here
InklingScore 66.9 · $1.87 / $4.68
Base entry
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Inkling ranks #24 of 217 on the public leaderboard with a score of 66.88/100. Its source-verified position is #20 of 104.
Inkling is a open weight model with a 1M context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.
Inkling sits in the Inkling family with Inkling-Small. 15 of 431 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #10, while its lowest eligible position is Coding at #104. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
Thinking Machines Lab · Model release
Inkling ranks #24 out of 217 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 66.88/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 15 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Inkling ranks #28 out of 55 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 69.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Inkling ranks #104 out of 134 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 42.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Inkling has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Inkling ranks #66 out of 129 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 48.2/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Inkling ranks #25 out of 33 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 51.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Inkling ranks #10 out of 38 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 90.9/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Inkling is an open-weight model from Thinking Machines Lab. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Inkling belongs to the Inkling family. Related tracked variants include Inkling-Small. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
No. Inkling currently has 36 source-displayable rows across 431 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
Inkling has a reported context window of 1M in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.
Related resources
Last updated August 13, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.