Model comparison
GPT-5 vs Inkling-Small
GPT-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 46.5 on the Noometry Index. Inkling-Small costs 5.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 33 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 scores higher in 7 categories and Inkling-Small in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where GPT-5 leads 69.5 to 42.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 50.1% for GPT-5 and 19.1% for Inkling-Small.
- Inkling-Small is cheaper at $0.45 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.
- Inkling-Small accepts more context: 524K tokens versus 400K.
- Inkling-Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GPT-5 | Inkling-Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Thinking Machines Lab |
| Noometry Index | 50.9 | 46.5 |
| Released | 2025-08-07 | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 400K | 524K |
| Max output | 128K | 1.05M |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $0.45 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 69 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 50.3 (#47), Inkling-Small: 43.6 (#85)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1418 | 1409 |
| SciCode | 42.9% | 48.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1436 | 1451 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.6% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 65% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 88% | — |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 60.7% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,162 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.67 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5: 33.1 (#56), Inkling-Small: —
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 49.6% | — |
| GDPval | 34.8% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 1.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 49.6% | — |
| BALROG | 32.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1133 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 69.6% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
GPT-5: 38.3 (#64), Inkling-Small: 38.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 9.9% | 40.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 65.7% | 84% |
| CritPt | 12.6% | 8.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 37% | 18% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1416 | 1423 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 23% | 6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150 | 150.15 |
| SimpleBench | 56.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 72.7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 10.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 12.7% | — |
| DTBench | 90.7% | — |
| LMCA | 40% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.4 | — |
Math GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 55.0 (#44), Inkling-Small: 45.1 (#77)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 55.4% | 46.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 22% | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 91.4% | 90% |
| ProofBench | 18% | 6% |
| LMArena Math | 1407 | 1459 |
| Omni-MATH | 64.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 98.1% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 32.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 56.6 (#43), Inkling-Small: 48.2 (#77)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 86.2% | 88.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 50.1% | 19.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1419 | 1442 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 25.3% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 86.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 10.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 14.7% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 79.2% | — |
Multimodal GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 46.8 (#13), Inkling-Small: 39.1 (#62)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1232 | 1235 |
| GeoBench | 81% | — |
| VPCT | 66% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-5: 51.4 (#110), Inkling-Small: 51.7 (#104)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1397 | 1402 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1422 | 1465 |
| LMArena French | 1410 | 1436 |
| LMArena German | 1416 | 1405 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1409 | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | 1360 | 1363 |
| LMArena Russian | 1406 | 1391 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1399 | 1428 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-5: 73.8 (#113), Inkling-Small: 73.8 (#114)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1388 | 1399 |
| IFEval | 87.5% | — |
Long Context GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 69.5 (#2), Inkling-Small: 42.7 (#118)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1399 | 1401 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 97.2% | — |
Writing & Preference GPT-5 leads
GPT-5: 63.4 (#65), Inkling-Small: 59.6 (#107)
| Benchmark | GPT-5 | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1406 | 1414 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1365 | 1331 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1627 | 1491 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1426 | 1418 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 86% | — |
| WildBench | 85.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5 better than Inkling-Small?
GPT-5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.9 to 46.5 on the Noometry Index. Inkling-Small costs 5.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5 or Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.45 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; GPT-5 lists at $1.25 and $10.
Is GPT-5 or Inkling-Small better for coding?
GPT-5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.3 versus 43.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Inkling-Small does, with 524K tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5 and Inkling-Small share?
33 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and Inkling-Small has 33.