Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Inkling 2 Small
Inkling 2 Small leads the LLM Stats Score 47.2 to 18.3. Inkling 2 Small is 12.6x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Thinking Machines Lab · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Inkling 2 Small leads the overall LLM Stats Score 47.2 to 18.3, ranking #39 overall.
In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Inkling 2 Small wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Inkling 2 Small is roughly 12.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Inkling 2 Small also accepts a larger context window (256,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude 3.5 Sonnet
- you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output
Choose Inkling 2 Small
- overall performance matters — it scores 47.2 and ranks #39 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 12.6x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 256,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
19 reported for Claude 3.5 Sonnet · 11 for Inkling 2 Small
Claude 3.5 Sonnet outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Inkling 2 Small is better at 2 benchmarks (GPQA, SWE-Bench Verified).
Inkling 2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($3.00/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Inkling 2 Small ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude 3.5 Sonnet ($15.00/1M tokens) is 15.0x more expensive than Inkling 2 Small ($1.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is more expensive than Inkling 2 Small.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Inkling 2 Small accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to Claude 3.5 Sonnet's 200,000 tokens. Only Claude 3.5 Sonnet specifies output context (200,000 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Inkling 2 Small support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Inkling 2 Small
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.
Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.
Proprietary
Closed source
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released on 2024-10-22, while Inkling 2 Small was released on 2026-11-05.
Inkling 2 Small is 25 months newer than Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
Oct 22, 2024
2.0 years ago
Nov 5, 2026
3 days ago
2.0yr newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude 3.5 Sonnet is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Inkling 2 Small is available from Thinking Machines Lab.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Inkling 2 Small
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Inkling 2 Small side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Inkling 2 Small.