Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

Start free brief

Inkling-Small

CurrentReleased Jul 30, 2026Open WeightHybrid1M context

Released Jul 30, 2026 see all recent releases

Decision reading
Inkling-Small scores 63.5 out of 100 and ranks #43 of 224. This profile shows 20 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #3. API pricing is $0.58 input and $1.44 output per million tokens, with cached input at $0.116.

Data as of August 22, 2026 · How the score is built

Strongest published evidence

Instruction Following ranks #3. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Validate before choosing

20 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Independent runtime speed has not been measured.

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

63.5/100

field median 58

#43 of 224 ranked models

Price

$0.58input / $1.44 output

input median $1

cached $0.12 · blended $1.01

Speed

Not measured

field median 91.5 tok/s

Time to first token not measured

Context

1Mtokens

field median 200,000

Reported for this model; direct source link not stored

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-Small category percentile values

  • Agentic24th percentile
  • Coding65th percentile
  • ReasoningNot eligible
  • KnowledgeNot eligible
  • MathNot eligible
  • MultilingualNot eligible
  • Multimodal27th percentile
  • Instruction following95th percentile

The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.

Eligible category ranks

  1. Agentic#105/137
  2. Coding#50/141
  3. ReasoningNot ranked
  4. KnowledgeNot ranked
  5. MathNot ranked
  6. MultilingualNot ranked
  7. Multimodal#25/34
  8. Inst. Following#3/41
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible

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.

Explore all models

The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.

Current modelInkling-Small · 63.5 score · $1.01 blended per million tokens
405060708090$0.50$1$5$10$25$50$100↘ frontierInkling-Small

Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score

How 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.

  1. Agentic4/4 verified
  2. Coding4/4 verified
  3. Reasoning2/2 verified
  4. Knowledge4/4 verified
  5. Math2/2 verified
  6. MultilingualNot measured
  7. Multimodal3/3 verified
  8. Inst. Following1/1 verified
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured

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 published
Context window
1M
Maximum output
Not sourced yet
Knowledge cutoff
Not sourced yet
Input modalities
Not sourced yet
Output modalities
Not sourced yet
Parameters
Not sourced yet
Availability
Thinking Machines Lab released BF16 and NVFP4 weights under Apache 2.0; the model also supports MXFP8 numerics. Tinker offers 64K and 256K fine-tuning tiers, playground access, and a 256K beta serverless endpoint. The open checkpoint 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 $0.12 per million cached input tokens
Self-host
Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
Rate limits
Not tracked yet

Deployment options

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 parameters

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 scores, ranks, weighting, benchmark coverage, and evidence status
CategoryScore
AgenticRank #105 of 137Percentile 24thWeight 22%4 benchmarksVerified40.6
CodingRank #50 of 141Percentile 65thWeight 20%4 benchmarksVerified53.6
ReasoningRank Not rankedWeight 17%2 benchmarksVerified37.1
KnowledgeRank Not rankedWeight 12%4 benchmarksVerified72.0
MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%2 benchmarksVerified77.1
MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measuredNot measured
MultimodalRank #25 of 34Percentile 27thWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified51.2
Inst. FollowingRank #3 of 41Percentile 95thWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified96.4

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.

Coding4 rows
Coding benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
SWE-bench VerifiedSoftware Engineering Benchmark VerifiedScore80.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 96%

Gap15.8 behindWeightWeighted 16%
SciCodeScientific Code BenchmarkScore48.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1%

Gap11.4 behindWeightWeighted 16%
SWE-bench ProScore55.9%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 80.3%

Gap24.4 behindWeightWeighted 10%
Terminal-Bench 2.0Score64.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9%

Gap27.2 behindWeightDisplay only
Agentic4 rows
Agentic benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
Terminal-Bench 2.0Score64.7%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 91.9%

Gap27.2 behindWeightWeighted 38%
BrowseCompScore77.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2%

Gap14.8 behindWeightWeighted 28%
MCP AtlasScore79.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1%

Gap8.5 behindWeightDisplay only
Toolathlon-VerifiedScore54.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 80.6%

Gap26.2 behindWeightDisplay only
Reasoning2 rows
Reasoning benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
ARC-AGI-2Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for AGI v2Score40.1%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.5%

Gap52.4 behindWeightWeighted 31%
CritPtCritical Physics TasksScore8.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 20.9%

Gap12.6 behindWeightDisplay only
Knowledge4 rows
Knowledge benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
HLEHumanity's Last ExamScore47.8%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 64.7%

Gap16.9 behindWeightWeighted 45%
GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&AScore89.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5%

Gap6 behindWeightWeighted 7%
GPQA-DGPQA DiamondScore89.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Sakana Fugu-Ultra · 95.5%

Gap6 behindWeightDisplay only
HLE w/o toolsHumanity's Last Exam without toolsScore31.6%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 59%

Gap27.4 behindWeightDisplay only
Math2 rows
Math benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
AIME26AIME 2026Score95.5%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2%

Gap3.7 behindWeightWeighted 25%
HMMT Feb 2026Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026Score90.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 97.1%

Gap6.9 behindWeightWeighted 25%
Multimodal3 rows
Multimodal benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding ProScore74%Versus best verified row

Best verified: GPT-5.4 Pro · 94%

Gap20 behindWeightWeighted 45%
CharXivCharXiv ReasoningScore81.3%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 93.5%

Gap12.2 behindWeightWeighted 25%
CharXiv w/o toolsCharXiv Reasoning without toolsScore77.4%Versus best verified row

Best verified: Claude Mythos 5 · 88.9%

Gap11.5 behindWeightDisplay only
Inst. Following1 row
Inst. Following benchmark values, best verified comparison, weight, and source status
IFBenchInstruction Following BenchmarkScore82.2%Versus best verified row

Best verified: MAI-Thinking-1 · 85%

Gap2.8 behindWeightWeighted 65%

Lineage

The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.

Jul 30, 2026 · you are here

Inkling-Small

Score 63.5 · $0.58 / $1.44

small · Small

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-Small ranks #43 of 224 on the public leaderboard with a score of 63.48/100. Its source-verified position is #33 of 104.

Inkling-Small is a open weight model with a 1M context window. No explicit reasoning mode is documented in this profile.

Thinking Machines Lab released BF16 and NVFP4 weights under Apache 2.0; the model also supports MXFP8 numerics. Tinker offers 64K and 256K fine-tuning tiers, playground access, and a 256K beta serverless endpoint. The open checkpoint supports up to 1M tokens.

Official exact-value snapshot from Thinking Machines Lab's July 30, 2026 Inkling-Small launch post at effort=0.99. We map the published HLE text-only and with-tools rows to hleNoTools and hle, GPQA Diamond to both the weighted GPQA lane and its exact display key, Terminal-Bench 2.1 Best Harness to the existing Terminal-Bench 2 slot, and CharXiv RQ with and without Python to charxiv and charxivNoTools. SimpleQA Verified, Global-MMLU-Lite, ARC-AGI-1, audio, forecasting, safety, and externally sourced index rows stay out of the model's fields where the local schema lacks an exact compatible key or keeps the source in a separate refresh pipeline.

Inkling-Small sits in the Inkling family with Inkling. 20 of 402 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.

Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #3, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #105. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.

Radar

Inkling-Small release history

Full release history

Frequently asked questions

How does Inkling-Small perform overall in AI benchmarks?

Inkling-Small ranks #43 out of 224 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 63.48/100. Its evidence status is Supported, and this profile shows 20 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.

Is Inkling-Small good for knowledge and understanding?

Inkling-Small has source-displayable benchmark coverage for knowledge and understanding, 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-Small good for coding and programming?

Inkling-Small ranks #50 out of 141 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 53.6/100. 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.

Is Inkling-Small good for mathematics?

Inkling-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-Small good for reasoning and logic?

Inkling-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-Small good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?

Inkling-Small ranks #105 out of 137 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 40.6/100. 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.

Is Inkling-Small good for multimodal and grounded tasks?

Inkling-Small ranks #25 out of 34 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 51.2/100. 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.

Is Inkling-Small good for instruction following?

Inkling-Small ranks #3 out of 41 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 96.4/100. That places it in the current top ten for this category. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.

Is Inkling-Small open source?

Inkling-Small 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.

Which sibling models are related to Inkling-Small?

Inkling-Small belongs to the Inkling family. Related tracked variants include Inkling. 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-Small have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?

No. Inkling-Small currently has 33 source-displayable rows across 402 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.

What is the context window size of Inkling-Small?

Inkling-Small 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.

Last updated August 22, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.

Watch Inkling-Small in the weekly brief

Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.