Noometry

Model comparison

Inkling vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Inkling is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.1 to 39.9 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 #80 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.9

Rank #156 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 40.4 to 28.2.
  • 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 Index44.139.9
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: 34.5 (#234), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
FrontierCode14%—
LMArena WebDev1413—
FrontierSWE4.1%—
SciCode47%—
WeirdML32.3%—
LMArena Coding1464—
ALE-Bench946—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Inkling: 29.6 (#85), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

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

Reasoning Inkling leads

Inkling: 40.4 (#56), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
Chess Puzzles21%23%
Epoch Capabilities Index148.54144.64
ARC-AGI-236.5%—
SimpleBench50%—
NYT Connections (extended)—43.8%
ARC-AGI-179.5%—
CritPt5.4%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1451—
Mystery Game Puzzles—15%
DTBench87.5%—
LMCA37.6%—

Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Inkling: 31.3 (#225), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

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 Math1479—

Knowledge Inkling leads

Inkling: 55.1 (#49), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond88.3%82.3%
SimpleQA Verified40.3%—
LMArena Expert1465—

Multilingual Not comparable

Inkling: 54.0 (#52), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Non-English1434—
LMArena Chinese1490—
LMArena French1458—
LMArena German1446—
LMArena Japanese1429—
LMArena Korean1404—
LMArena Russian1429—
LMArena Spanish1448—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Inkling: 75.1 (#71), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1426—

Long Context Not comparable

Inkling: 43.8 (#86), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1434—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Inkling: 65.2 (#51), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkInklingQwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Text1441—
LMArena Creative Writing1387—
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 39.9 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