Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.1 vs Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 5 categories and Inkling-Small in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Inkling-Small leads 44.9 to 22.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 12.6% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 46.3% for Inkling-Small.
- Inkling-Small is cheaper at $0.45 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Inkling-Small accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 200K.
- Inkling-Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Thinking Machines Lab |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 46.5 |
| Released | 2025-08-05 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 200K | 524K |
| Max output | 32K | 1.05M |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.45 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 48 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69), Inkling-Small: 43.3 (#80)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | 1408 |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1451 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| SciCode | — | 48.7% |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38), Inkling-Small: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |
Reasoning Inkling-Small leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70), Inkling-Small: 39.0 (#53)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 18% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1424 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | 6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 150.13 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 40.1% |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 84% |
| CritPt | — | 8.3% |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| DTBench | 80% | — |
| LMCA | 37.1% | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math Inkling-Small leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267), Inkling-Small: 44.9 (#65)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | 46.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 90% |
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1453 |
| ProofBench | — | 6% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Inkling-Small leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93), Inkling-Small: 48.3 (#71)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 88.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1442 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 19.1% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
Multimodal Inkling-Small leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114), Inkling-Small: 38.4 (#59)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1235 |
| VPCT | 35% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90), Inkling-Small: 51.7 (#102)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1400 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1458 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1438 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1412 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1399 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1355 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1392 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1426 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53), Inkling-Small: 73.9 (#112)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1397 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60), Inkling-Small: 42.7 (#113)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1401 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads
Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70), Inkling-Small: 59.8 (#102)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1413 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1330 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1420 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1491 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.5 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.45 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Inkling-Small better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (44.3 vs 43.3); test both on your own repository before choosing.
Which has the bigger context window?
Inkling-Small does, with 524K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Inkling-Small share?
25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Inkling-Small has 33.