Data as of November 7, 2026 · How the score is built
Released Nov 5, 20261M contextThinking Machines Lab: Inkling 2 Small model card
Inkling 2 Small
Decision readingInkling 2 Small scores 59.1 out of 100 and ranks #56 of 212. This profile shows 33 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #12. API pricing is $0.3 input and $1 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.03.
Released Nov 5, 2026 — see all recent releases
Decision snapshot
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
59.1/100
field median 50.1#56 of 212 ranked models
Public
#56of 212
Verified —
Price
$0.30input / $1 output
input median $0.60cached $0.030 · blended $0.65
Speed
Not measured
field median 92 tok/sTime to first token not measured
Context
1Mtokens
field median 256,000Maximum output length is tracked separately
Strongest published evidence
Multimodal & Grounded ranks #12. Particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Validate before choosing
33 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.
Source-linked · 33 displayable benchmark rows
Category score record
Scores 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 #26 of 131Percentile 81stWeight 22%5 benchmarksVerified | 59.9 | 5 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingRank #20 of 157Percentile 88thWeight 20%6 benchmarksVerified | 59.7 | 6 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%1 benchmarkVerified | 86.1 | 1 benchmark | Verified | |||
| MultimodalRank #12 of 59Percentile 81stWeight 12%9 benchmarksVerified | 86.6 | 9 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeRank #46 of 178Percentile 75thWeight 12%2 benchmarksVerified | 60.4 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified | 85.9 | 2 benchmarks | Verified |
33 of 817 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
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.
- Agentic5/5 verified
- Coding6/6 verified
- Reasoning1/1 verified
- Multimodal9/9 verified
- Knowledge2/2 verified
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- Math2/2 verified
Capability shape
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 2 Small category percentile values
- Agentic81st percentile
- Coding88th percentile
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Multimodal81st percentile
- Knowledge75th percentile
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#26/131
- Coding#20/157
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Multimodal#12/59
- Knowledge#46/178
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
Benchmark ledger
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.
Coding6 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | Score72.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 79.0% | Gap6.9 behind | Weight15% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score81.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5.5 · 93.9% | Gap12.7 behind | Weight5% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark Verified | Score82.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96% | Gap13.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| sweMarathon | Score38.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Step 5 Preview · 72.7% | Gap33.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score85.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap7.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| PostTrainBench v1.2 | Score31.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 36.5% | Gap4.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Agentic5 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrowseComp | Score90.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Atria Dawn Preview · 92.5% | Gap2.3 behind | Weight8% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| JobBench | Score70.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Wonder Full · 75.3% | Gap4.8 behind | Weight6% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score85% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark Open · 89.2% | Gap4.2 behind | Weight4% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| DeepSearchQA | Score90.9% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Atria Dawn Preview · 96.0% | Gap5.1 behind | Weight2% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | Score85.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: SWE-2 · 92.8% | Gap7.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Reasoning1 row
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LongBench v2 | Score70.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 70.6% | GapBest verified | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
Multimodal9 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score87.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap5.8 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| CharXiv w/o toolsCharXiv Reasoning without tools | Score85.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 89% | Gap3.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Chartography (no tools)Chartography without tools | Score36.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 4 Carbon · 72.5% | Gap35.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Chartography (tools)Chartography with image and code tools | Score80.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 90.2% | Gap9.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BabyVision | Score68.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 82.0% | Gap13.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BabyVision w/ PythonBabyVision with Python | Score93.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 95.4% | Gap1.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ScreenSpot Pro | Score83.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 92.7% | Gap8.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| PerceptionBenchPerceptionBench (Internal) | Score64.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Kimi K3.1 Pro · 68.3% | Gap3.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| MathVision | Score92.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 95.2% | Gap2.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Knowledge2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score93% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap3 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score93.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Math2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HMMT Feb 2026Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026 | Score95.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 97.1% | Gap1.3 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| Apex | Score63.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 74.2% | Gap10.7 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
External signals8 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PMPP-HardPMPP-Hard GPU kernel optimization (AUC, 0-10 hours) | Score494.27 task-hours | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 494.27 task-hours | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ScreenSpot Pro w/ PythonScreenSpot Pro with Python | Score91.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 91.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| ComplexConstraintsComplexConstraints (Surge) | Score44.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 44.5% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| EnterpriseBench-CoreCraftEnterpriseBench: CoreCraft (Surge) | Score71.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 71.8% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Diligence BenchDiligenceBench (Thoughtful), best harness | Score58.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 58.1% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| DAYJOB (Finance)DAYJOB, finance track | Score14.3% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 14.3% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| StrongREJECTStrongREJECT (no jailbreak) | Score97.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 97.8% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| PatchEval | Score79.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Inkling 2 Small · 79.6% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
What it costs to get this score
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.
Inkling 2 Small · 59.1 score · $0.65 blended per million tokens
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
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not publishedTinker models and pricing
- Context window
- 1MTinker models and pricing
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not disclosed by the provider
- Availability
- Available on Tinker for fine-tuning (64K and 256K tiers), the Tinker Playground and beta serverless sampling at 256K context, with closed weights for now. Thinking Machines plans to release full weights under Apache 2.0 the week after launch, once external safety testing and red-teaming finish. The model accepts text and image input (no audio) and supports up to 1M tokens.
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Current
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Published at $0.030 per million cached input tokensTinker models and pricing
- Self-host
- Weights are not published
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Inkling 2 Small ranks #56 of 212 on the public leaderboard with a score of 59.06/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Inkling 2 Small is a proprietary model with a 1M context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.
Available on Tinker for fine-tuning (64K and 256K tiers), the Tinker Playground and beta serverless sampling at 256K context, with closed weights for now. Thinking Machines plans to release full weights under Apache 2.0 the week after launch, once external safety testing and red-teaming finish. The model accepts text and image input (no audio) and supports up to 1M tokens.
Inkling 2 Small sits in the Inkling family with Inkling, Inkling-Small. 33 of 817 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #12, while its lowest eligible position is Knowledge at #46. particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Last updated November 7, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Questions
How does Inkling 2 Small perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Inkling 2 Small ranks #56 out of 212 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 59.06/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 33 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for knowledge and understanding?
Inkling 2 Small ranks #46 out of 178 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 60.4/100. 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.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for coding and programming?
Inkling 2 Small ranks #20 out of 157 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 59.7/100. 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.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for mathematics?
Inkling 2 Small 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.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for reasoning and logic?
Inkling 2 Small has source-displayable benchmark coverage for reasoning and logic, 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.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Inkling 2 Small ranks #26 out of 131 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 59.9/100. 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.
Is Inkling 2 Small good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Inkling 2 Small ranks #12 out of 59 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 86.6/100. 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.
Which sibling models are related to Inkling 2 Small?
Inkling 2 Small belongs to the Inkling family. Related tracked variants include Inkling, 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.
Does Inkling 2 Small have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Inkling 2 Small currently has 53 source-displayable rows. 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.
What is the context window size of Inkling 2 Small?
Inkling 2 Small has a documented context window of 1M. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.