ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Inkling Small vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

Inkling Small comes out ahead, 70 to 65 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Thinking Machines

    Inkling Small

    Released Jul 30, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI150.2
    • Price$0.50 / $1.20
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Inkling Small

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

    Released Feb 15, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI146.7
    • Price$0.60 / $3.60
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 397B-A17B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Inkling Small is our pick

Inkling Small is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65). It leads on capability, price and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityInkling SmallCapabilities Index (ECI): Inkling Small 150.2 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7
  • Lowest priceInkling SmallInkling Small $0.675 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B $1.35 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextInkling SmallInkling Small 1,048,576 · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 397B-A17BInkling Small: Text, Images, Audio · Qwen3.5 397B-A17B: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightInkling SmallQwen3.5 397B-A17B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%7874
Price25%5844
Inputs & features15%7090
Context window10%6137
Overall100%70/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Inkling Small vs Qwen3.5 397B-A17B specifications side by side
SpecificationInkling SmallThinking MachinesQwen3.5 397B-A17BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)150.2 (best)146.7
ECI rank#47 of 148 (best)#67 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions88.5% (best)86.4%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics46.3% (best)31.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics90.0% (best)88.9%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions19.1%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.50 (best)$0.60
Output$1.20 (best)$3.60
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.675 (best)$1.35
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 11 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)262,144 tokens
Max output1,048,576 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioYesYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0Open
API model ID—qwen3.5-397b-a17b
API providers1123 (best)
ReleasedJul 30, 2026Feb 15, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Inkling Small$7.40
  • Qwen3.5 397B-A17B$13.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Inkling Small or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Inkling Small is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (65). It leads on capability, price and context window. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Inkling Small or Qwen3.5 397B-A17B?

Inkling Small is cheaper at $0.50 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). Qwen3.5 397B-A17B costs $0.60 input / $3.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.675 per million tokens for Inkling Small versus $1.35 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B (2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Inkling Small scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Inkling Small 150.2 (#47 of 148) and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 146.7 (#67 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (147.5–152.1 vs 144.8–148.2), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Inkling Small 88.5%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 86.4%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Inkling Small 46.3%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 31.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Inkling Small 90.0%, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B 88.9%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Inkling Small and Qwen3.5 397B-A17B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Inkling Small leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Inkling Small has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3.5 397B-A17B. Maximum output per response: Inkling Small up to 1,048,576, Qwen3.5 397B-A17B up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Inkling Small accepts text, images and audio; Qwen3.5 397B-A17B accepts text, images, audio and video. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Inkling Small is the newest, released Jul 30, 2026. Qwen3.5 397B-A17B came out Feb 15, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons