Inkling 2 Small vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Inkling 2 Small leads the LLM Stats Score 47.1 to 31.6. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 1.5x cheaper per token.
Thinking Machines Lab · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Inkling 2 Small leads the overall LLM Stats Score 47.1 to 31.6, ranking #41 overall.
In the 6 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Inkling 2 Small wins 6; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is roughly 1.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B also accepts a larger context window (262,144 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 47.1 and ranks #41 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 6 of 6 exact shared results
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- cost matters — it's about 1.5x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
11 reported for Inkling 2 Small · 49 for Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Inkling 2 Small outperforms in 6 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, MCP Atlas, MMMU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified), while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is better at 0 benchmarks.
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, Inkling 2 Small ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.0x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Inkling 2 Small ($1.00/1M tokens) is 1.1x more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ($0.95/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Inkling 2 Small is more expensive than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Inkling 2 Small has 559.0B more parameters than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B, making it 1597.1% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Inkling 2 Small's 256,000 tokens. Only Qwen3.6-35B-A3B specifies output context (262,144 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Inkling 2 Small and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Inkling 2 Small
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Inkling 2 Small is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Inkling 2 Small was released on 2026-11-05, while Qwen3.6-35B-A3B was released on 2026-04-16.
Inkling 2 Small is 7 months newer than Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.
Nov 5, 2026
4 days ago
6mo newerApr 16, 2026
6 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Inkling 2 Small is available from Thinking Machines Lab. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is available from DeepInfra.
Inkling 2 Small
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Inkling 2 Small and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Inkling 2 Small vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B.