Model comparison

Inkling vs Ring-2.6-1T

Inkling has enough public results to be ranked (#75); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Inkling Thinking Machines Lab

44.1

Rank #75 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Inkling scores higher in 1 category and Ring-2.6-1T in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Inkling leads 40.6 to 25.3.

Side by side

Inkling and Ring-2.6-1T specifications
InklingRing-2.6-1T
ProviderThinking Machines LabAnt Group (inclusionAI)
Noometry Index44.136.3
Released2026-07-152026-05-14
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window66K—
Max output66K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.87—
Output $ / M tokens$4.68—
Results tracked413

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

Category by category

Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads

Inkling: 34.1 (#229), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
SciCode47%42.4%
ALE-Bench946432.57
FrontierCode14%—
LMArena WebDev1412—
FrontierSWE4.1%—
WeirdML32.3%—
LMArena Coding1463—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Inkling: 29.5 (#76), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
APEX-Agents33.8%—
τ²-bench Banking25%—

Reasoning Inkling leads

Inkling: 40.6 (#48), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
CritPt5.4%3.7%
ARC-AGI-236.5%—
SimpleBench50%—
ARC-AGI-179.5%—
Chess Puzzles21%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1452—
DTBench87.5%—
LMCA37.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index148.6—

Math Not comparable

Inkling: 31.2 (#198), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)33.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%—
ProofBench0%—
LMArena Math1482—

Knowledge Not comparable

Inkling: 55.2 (#44), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
GPQA Diamond88.3%—
SimpleQA Verified40.3%—
LMArena Expert1468—

Multilingual Not comparable

Inkling: 54.2 (#49), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
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), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
LMArena Instruction Following1427—

Long Context Not comparable

Inkling: 43.9 (#79), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
LMArena Longer Query1436—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Inkling: 65.5 (#48), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkInklingRing-2.6-1T
LMArena Text1443—
LMArena Creative Writing1390—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1611—
EQ-Bench 41226—
LMArena Multi-Turn1436—

Frequently asked questions

Is Inkling better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Inkling has enough public results to be ranked (#75); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Inkling or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.1 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Inkling and Ring-2.6-1T share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Inkling has 41 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper