# Inkling-Small vs Qwen3.6 Plus

> Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 46.5 on the Noometry Index. Inkling-Small costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/inkling-small-vs-qwen3-6-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 27

## Summary

- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Inkling-Small scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Inkling-Small leads 38.6 to 29.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 19.1% for Inkling-Small and 44.1% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Inkling-Small is cheaper at $0.45 / $1.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 524K.
- Inkling-Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Thinking Machines Lab | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 46.5 | 47.5 |
| Rank | 63 | 62 |
| Context | 524K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.45 | $0.50 |
| Output $/M | $1.20 | $3 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Inkling-Small: 43.6 (#85)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1409 | 1461 |
| SciCode | 48.7% | 40.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1451 | 1467 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Inkling-Small: —
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |

## Reasoning

- Inkling-Small: 38.6 (#63)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 8.3% | 2.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 18% | 17% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1423 | 1449 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 6% | 12% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 150.15 | 147.65 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 40.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 84% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| DTBench | — | 81.9% |
| LMCA | — | 33.1% |

## Math

- Inkling-Small: 45.1 (#77)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 46.3% | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 90% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1459 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 17.1% | — |
| ProofBench | 6% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |

## Knowledge

- Inkling-Small: 48.2 (#77)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 88.5% | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 19.1% | 44.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1442 | 1454 |

## Multimodal

- Inkling-Small: 39.1 (#62)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: —

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1235 | — |

## Multilingual

- Inkling-Small: 51.7 (#104)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1402 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1465 | 1477 |
| LMArena French | 1436 | 1455 |
| LMArena German | 1405 | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | 1363 | 1379 |
| LMArena Russian | 1391 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1428 | 1432 |

## Instruction Following

- Inkling-Small: 73.8 (#114)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1399 | 1425 |

## Long Context

- Inkling-Small: 42.7 (#118)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1401 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |

## Writing & Preference

- Inkling-Small: 59.6 (#107)
- Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)

| Benchmark | Inkling-Small | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1414 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1331 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1418 | 1438 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Inkling-Small better than Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 46.5 on the Noometry Index. Inkling-Small costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Inkling-Small or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Inkling-Small is cheaper. It lists at $0.45 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus lists at $0.50 and $3.

### Is Inkling-Small or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?

Inkling-Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 40.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 524K.

### How many benchmarks do Inkling-Small and Qwen3.6 Plus share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Inkling-Small has 33 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.