Noometry

Model comparison

Inkling vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Inkling is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 47× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Inkling's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.

Inkling Thinking Machines Lab

44.1

Rank #75 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.5

Rank #152 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Inkling scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 1 category; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Inkling leads 40.6 to 27.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3): 33.3% for Inkling and 19.3% for Qwen3.7 Flash.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $1.87 / $4.68 for Inkling.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 66K.
  • Inkling has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

InklingQwen3.7 Flash
ProviderThinking Machines LabAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index44.139.5
Released2026-07-152026-07-15
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window66K1M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.87$0.03
Output $ / M tokens$4.68$0.13
Results tracked417

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Inkling: 34.1 (#229), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
FrontierCode14%—
LMArena WebDev1412—
FrontierSWE4.1%—
SciCode47%—
WeirdML32.3%—
LMArena Coding1463—
ALE-Bench946—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Inkling: 29.5 (#76), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
APEX-Agents33.8%—
τ²-bench Banking25%—

Reasoning Inkling leads

Inkling: 40.6 (#48), Qwen3.7 Flash: 27.3 (#108)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
Chess Puzzles21%23%
Epoch Capabilities Index148.6144.62
ARC-AGI-236.5%—
SimpleBench50%—
NYT Connections (extended)—43.8%
ARC-AGI-179.5%—
CritPt5.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1452—
Mystery Game Puzzles—15%
DTBench87.5%—
LMCA37.6%—

Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Inkling: 31.2 (#198), Qwen3.7 Flash: 37.3 (#100)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)33.3%19.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%86.7%
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench0%—
LMArena Math1482—

Knowledge Inkling leads

Inkling: 55.2 (#44), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#69)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond88.3%82.3%
SimpleQA Verified40.3%—
LMArena Expert1468—

Multilingual Not comparable

Inkling: 54.2 (#49), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1434—
LMArena Chinese1495—
LMArena French1453—
LMArena German1456—
LMArena Japanese1428—
LMArena Korean1401—
LMArena Russian1430—
LMArena Spanish1442—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Inkling: 75.3 (#65), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1427—

Long Context Not comparable

Inkling: 43.9 (#79), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1436—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Inkling: 65.5 (#48), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1390—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1611—
EQ-Bench 41226—
LMArena Multi-Turn1436—

Frequently asked questions

Is Inkling better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Inkling is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 39.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.7 Flash costs 47× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Inkling's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Inkling or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; Inkling lists at $1.87 and $4.68.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks do Inkling and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Inkling has 41 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper