Skip to content

Inkling vs Inkling (batch)

Inkling

thinkingmachines

73#145
vs
Inkling (batch)

thinkingmachines

73#147
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalInklingDeltaInkling (batch)
Capabilities
67
--
67
Benchmarks
72
--
72
Pricing
96
--
96
Context window size
96
+5
91
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
91
--
91
Overall Result
1 wins
of 6
0 wins
Inkling wins 1 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (10 data points)
InklingInkling (batch)
Inkling

72.9

current score

Leader

Inkling

right now

Inkling (batch)

72.7

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Inkling

thinkingmachines

Per request$0.003025
Daily$10.08
Monthly$302.50
Annual$3630.00

Inkling (batch)

thinkingmachines

Per request$0.003025
Daily$10.08
Monthly$302.50
Annual$3630.00
Inkling pricing:
Input:$1.00/M tokens
Output:$4.05/M tokens
Inkling (batch) pricing:
Input:$1.00/M tokens
Output:$4.05/M tokens
Winner
Inkling

thinkingmachines

73

Composite Score

Inkling (batch)

thinkingmachines

73

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricInklingInkling (batch)Winner
Overall Score
73
73
Inkling
Rank#145#147
Inkling
Quality Rank#145#147
Inkling
Adoption Rank#145#147
Inkling
Parameters------
Context Window1049K524K
Inkling
Pricing$1.00/$4.05/M$1.00/$4.05/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
67
67
Inkling
Benchmarks
72
72
Inkling
Pricing
96
96
Inkling
Context window size
96
91
Inkling
Recency
100
100
Inkling
Output Capacity
91
91
Inkling
Benchmark Head-to-Head(1 benchmarks)
Inkling: 01 tiesInkling (batch): 0
Inkling
Inkling (batch)
Normalized 0-100%
Arena Elo
14401440
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

InklingStrong Performer

Scores 73/100 (rank #145), placing it in the top 50% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Inkling (batch)Strong Performer

Scores 73/100 (rank #147), placing it in the top 50% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Inkling when you need:

  • Processing long documents or large codebases (1049K token context)
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model

Choose Inkling (batch) when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
InklingBest Value
Input cost$1.00/M tokens
Output cost$4.05/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.069
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$75.75
Inkling (batch)
Input cost$1.00/M tokens
Output cost$4.05/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.069
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$75.75

Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.

Latency & Speed
InklingFaster
Speed score0/100
Inkling (batch)
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Inkling

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Inkling also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Inkling

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Inkling

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($4.05/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Inkling

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (73/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Inkling

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Inkling
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Inkling

Inkling and Inkling (batch) are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.20000000000000284 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

Inkling
Recommended

by thinkingmachines

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 0% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by thinkingmachines

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityInklingInkling (batch)
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Inkling

thinkingmachines

$6.66
estimated monthly cost

Inkling (batch)

thinkingmachines

$6.66
estimated monthly cost

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterInklingInkling (batch)
Context Window1.0M524K
Max Output Tokens471,859471,859
Open SourceYesYes
CreatedJul 17, 2026Jul 17, 2026
Last updated: 57m ago

相关对比

Inkling vs Inkling (batch) (2026) | LM Market Cap