Model comparison
GPT-5.1 vs Inkling
GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.8 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 32 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 32 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.1 scores higher in 5 categories and Inkling in 4 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.1 leads 50.3 to 31.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 60.8% for GPT-5.1 and 32.3% for Inkling.
- Inkling is cheaper at $1.87 / $4.68 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1.
- GPT-5.1 accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 66K.
- Inkling has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5.1 | Inkling | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Thinking Machines Lab |
| Noometry Index | 48.8 | 44.1 |
| Released | 2025-11-13 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 66K |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $1.87 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $4.68 |
| Results tracked | 63 | 41 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 46.9 (#59), Inkling: 34.1 (#229)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1395 | 1412 |
| SciCode | 43.3% | 47% |
| WeirdML | 60.8% | 32.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1454 | 1463 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,192 | 946 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 68% | — |
| FrontierCode | — | 14% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 66% | — |
| FrontierSWE | — | 4.1% |
| GSO | 13.7% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 72.5% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 32.5 (#55), Inkling: 29.5 (#76)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 47.6% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 33.8% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 25% |
| DeepResearch Bench | 42.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1199 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 1,473 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
GPT-5.1: 39.9 (#50), Inkling: 40.6 (#48)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 17.6% | 36.5% |
| SimpleBench | 53.2% | 50% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 72.8% | 79.5% |
| CritPt | 4.9% | 5.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | 32% | 21% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1457 | 1452 |
| DTBench | 90.1% | 87.5% |
| LMCA | 43.9% | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.66 | 148.6 |
| EnigmaEval | 11.2% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 95.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 19% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 72.1% | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 78.8% | — |
Math GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 50.3 (#45), Inkling: 31.2 (#198)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 88.6% | 88.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1446 | 1482 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 33.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 4.9% |
| ProofBench | — | 0% |
| Omni-MATH | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 94.5% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 31% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge Inkling leads
GPT-5.1: 50.5 (#65), Inkling: 55.2 (#44)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 87.6% | 88.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 48% | 40.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1470 | 1468 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 23.7% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 57.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.9% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 44.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-5.1: 44.0 (#17), Inkling: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1250 | — |
| VPCT | 58.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1403 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-5.1: 54.0 (#51), Inkling: 54.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1431 | 1434 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1495 | 1495 |
| LMArena French | 1451 | 1453 |
| LMArena German | 1439 | 1456 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1453 | 1428 |
| LMArena Korean | 1401 | 1401 |
| LMArena Russian | 1435 | 1430 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1430 | 1442 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 84.0 (#1), Inkling: 75.3 (#65)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1442 | 1427 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 93.3% | — |
| IFEval | 93.5% | — |
Long Context GPT-5.1 leads
GPT-5.1: 47.6 (#14), Inkling: 43.9 (#79)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1448 | 1436 |
| CL-bench | 23.7% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 17.3% | — |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
GPT-5.1: 64.7 (#53), Inkling: 65.5 (#48)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.1 | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1443 | 1443 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1427 | 1390 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1449 | 1436 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1611 |
| WildBench | 86.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1226 |
| LiveBench Language | 80.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.1 better than Inkling?
GPT-5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.8 to 44.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 or Inkling?
Inkling is cheaper. It lists at $1.87 per million input tokens and $4.68 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1 lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is GPT-5.1 or Inkling better for coding?
GPT-5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.9 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.1 does, with 400K tokens against 66K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.1 and Inkling share?
32 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.1 has 63 scored results on Noometry and Inkling has 41.