Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Inkling-Small
Inkling-Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.5 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Inkling-Small in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Inkling-Small leads 59.6 to 34.1.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Thinking Machines Lab |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 46.5 |
| Released | — | 2026-07-15 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 524K |
| Max output | — | 1.05M |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.45 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.20 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Inkling-Small: 43.6 (#85)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1451 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1409 |
| SciCode | — | 48.7% |
Reasoning Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Inkling-Small: 38.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1423 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 40.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 84% |
| CritPt | — | 8.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 18% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 150.15 |
Math Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Inkling-Small: 45.1 (#77)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | 1459 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 46.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 90% |
| ProofBench | — | 6% |
Knowledge Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Inkling-Small: 48.2 (#77)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1442 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 19.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Inkling-Small: 39.1 (#62)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1235 |
Multilingual Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Inkling-Small: 51.7 (#104)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1402 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1465 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1391 |
| LMArena French | — | 1436 |
| LMArena German | — | 1405 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1405 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1428 |
Instruction Following Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Inkling-Small: 73.8 (#114)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1399 |
Long Context Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Inkling-Small: 42.7 (#118)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1401 |
Writing & Preference Inkling-Small leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Inkling-Small: 59.6 (#107)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Inkling-Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1414 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1331 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1418 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1491 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Inkling-Small?
Inkling-Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 46.5 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Inkling-Small better for coding?
Inkling-Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Inkling-Small share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Inkling-Small has 33.