The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Inkling 2 Small vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Inkling 2 Small leads the LLM Stats Score 47.2 to -6.6. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is 38.0x cheaper per token.

Thinking Machines Lab · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Inkling 2 Small leads the overall LLM Stats Score 47.2 to -6.6, ranking #39 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Inkling 2 Small wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is roughly 38.0x 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 Inkling 2 Small

  • overall performance matters — it scores 47.2 and ranks #39 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 256,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026

Choose Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

  • cost matters — it's about 38.0x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Inkling 2 Small
Thinking Machines Lab
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
47.2
#39
-6.6
#403
Reasoning
47.9
#24
-7.3
#396
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.30 / M
$0.01 / M
Output price
$1.00 / M
$0.02 / M
Context window
256,000
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Inkling 2 Small
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Tool use
28.3#27
4.7#189
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Inkling 2 Small · 15 for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

1 shared

Inkling 2 Small outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GPQA), while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Inkling 2 Small significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Nov 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Inkling 2 Small ($0.30/1M tokens) is 30.0x more expensive than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct ($0.01/1M tokens).

For output processing, Inkling 2 Small ($1.00/1M tokens) is 50.0x more expensive than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct ($0.02/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Inkling 2 Small is more expensive than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Nov 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
Thinking Machines Lab
Inkling 2 Small
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input tokens$0.01
Output tokens$0.02
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

590.8B diff

Inkling 2 Small has 590.8B more parameters than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct, making it 18404.7% larger.

Thinking Machines Lab
Inkling 2 Small
594.0Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
3.2Bparameters
594.0B
Inkling 2 Small
3.2B
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Inkling 2 Small accepts 256,000 input tokens compared to Llama 3.2 3B Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Only Llama 3.2 3B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Thinking Machines Lab
Inkling 2 Small
Input256,000 tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Mon Nov 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Inkling 2 Small supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.2 3B Instruct does not.

Inkling 2 Small can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Inkling 2 Small

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Inkling 2 Small is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct uses Llama 3.2 Community License.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Inkling 2 Small

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Llama 3.2 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Inkling 2 Small was released on 2026-11-05, while Llama 3.2 3B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25.

Inkling 2 Small is 26 months newer than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct.

Inkling 2 Small

Nov 5, 2026

4 days ago

2.1yr newer
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

2.1 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Inkling 2 Small is available from Thinking Machines Lab. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is available from DeepInfra.

Inkling 2 Small

thinking-machines logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.01/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.02/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Inkling 2 Small and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Inkling 2 Small
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Inkling 2 Small vs Llama 3.2 3B Instruct.

Which is better, Inkling 2 Small or Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Inkling 2 Small leads the LLM Stats Score 47.2 to -6.6. Inkling 2 Small is made by Thinking Machines Lab and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Inkling 2 Small compare to Llama 3.2 3B Instruct in benchmarks?

Inkling 2 Small scores GPQA: 93.0%, BrowseComp: 90.2%, CharXiv-R: 85.6%, MCP Atlas: 85.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 82.2%. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct scores NIH/Multi-needle: 84.7%, ARC-C: 78.6%, GSM8k: 77.7%, IFEval: 77.4%, HellaSwag: 69.8%.

Is Inkling 2 Small cheaper than Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is 30.0x cheaper for input tokens. Inkling 2 Small costs $0.30/M input and $1.00/M output via thinking-machines. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs $0.01/M input and $0.02/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Inkling 2 Small and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Inkling 2 Small supports 256K tokens and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Inkling 2 Small and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (47.2 vs -6.6), context window (256K vs 128K), input pricing ($0.30 vs $0.01/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.2 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Inkling 2 Small and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct?

Inkling 2 Small is developed by Thinking Machines Lab and Llama 3.2 3B Instruct is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons