Skip to content
Model Pareto

Compare models

Side by side: quality per category, price, speed, and every benchmark cell with where it came from. Pick up to four.
InklingGPT-6 AstraClaude Opus 5.5Claude Fable 5.1Up to 4 models — remove one to add another.
Focus

Writing & chat: quality vs price

Compared models are ringed; the other 142 ranked here are greyed.

Lower price is better. Pareto frontier: Gemma 4 E4B, Qwen3.5 4B, Gemma 4 12B, Qwen3.5 9B, Gemma 4 26B A4B, GPT-6 Luna, Qwen3.8 Flash-Next, MiMo-V2.6-Pro, Step 5 Preview, GLM-5.3, Kimi K3, Claude Opus 5.5, Claude Opus 5, Claude Fable 5.1. 52 models are not plotted: Intern-S2-Preview (35B-A3B), Xing4.0-29B-A4B, Nex-N2-Pro, Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B, Apriel-v1.6-15B-Thinker, Command A+, EXAONE 4.5 33B, HyperNova 60B 2605, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B, K2 Think V2, K2-V2, Solar Open 100B, Step3 VL 10B, Tri-21B-Think, Falcon-H1R-7B, North Mini Code, NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 4B, LFM2.5-8B-A1B, LongCat Flash Lite, MiniCPM5-1B, Jamba Reasoning 3B, LFM2 24B A2B, Nanbeige4.1-3B, HyperCLOVA X SEED Think (32B), INTELLECT-3, Olmo 3 7B Think, LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1, LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking, Devstral 2, Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct, Olmo 3.1 32B Think, Gemma 4 E2B, Qwen3.5 2B, EXAONE 4.0 32B, Devstral Small 2, Jamba 1.7 Large, MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B, LFM2.5-VL-1.6B, Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 70B, Molmo2-8B, Jamba 1.7 Mini, Kimi Linear 48B A3B Instruct, Exaone 4.0 1.2B, Granite 4.0 H 1B, Granite 4.0 Micro, Qwen3.5 0.8B, Molmo 7B-D, Tiny Aya Global, Granite 4.0 H 350M, Granite 4.0 350M, Gemma 3 270M.

52 models with no price data — shown in the strip at the left edge

Intern-S2-Preview (35B-A3B), Xing4.0-29B-A4B, Nex-N2-Pro, Nemotron Cascade 2 30B A3B, Apriel-v1.6-15B-Thinker, Command A+, EXAONE 4.5 33B, HyperNova 60B 2605, DiffusionGemma 26B A4B, K2 Think V2, K2-V2, Solar Open 100B, Step3 VL 10B, Tri-21B-Think, Falcon-H1R-7B, North Mini Code, NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 4B, LFM2.5-8B-A1B, LongCat Flash Lite, MiniCPM5-1B, Jamba Reasoning 3B, LFM2 24B A2B, Nanbeige4.1-3B, HyperCLOVA X SEED Think (32B), INTELLECT-3, Olmo 3 7B Think, LFM2.5-1.2B-Instruct, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1, LFM2.5-1.2B-Thinking, Devstral 2, Olmo 3.1 32B Instruct, Olmo 3.1 32B Think, Gemma 4 E2B, Qwen3.5 2B, EXAONE 4.0 32B, Devstral Small 2, Jamba 1.7 Large, MiniCPM-V 4.6 1.3B, LFM2.5-VL-1.6B, Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 70B, Molmo2-8B, Jamba 1.7 Mini, Kimi Linear 48B A3B Instruct, Exaone 4.0 1.2B, Granite 4.0 H 1B, Granite 4.0 Micro, Qwen3.5 0.8B, Molmo 7B-D, Tiny Aya Global, Granite 4.0 H 350M, Granite 4.0 350M, Gemma 3 270M

  • Best-value frontier (nothing is both cheaper and better)
  • Evidencestrong → weak
  • Estimated from other categories
  • Inkling
    Quality
    63.8
    Rank
    #38/146
    Price
    $1.76/M tok
    Speed
    184tok/s
    In$1.00▾Out$4.05▾/M tok

    vs Claude Fable 5.1: −33.8 quality · 0.09× price

  • GPT-6 Astra
    Quality
    92.1
    Rank
    #4/146
    Price
    $20.0/M tok
    Speed
    52tok/s
    In$10Out$50/M tok

    vs Claude Fable 5.1: −5.5 quality · 1× price

  • Claude Opus 5.5
    Quality
    93.0
    Rank
    #3/146
    Price
    $8.00/M tok
    Speed
    92tok/s
    In$4.00Out$20/M tok

    vs Claude Fable 5.1: −4.6 quality · 0.4× price

  • Claude Fable 5.1
    Quality
    97.6
    Rank
    #1/146
    Price
    $20.0/M tok
    Speed
    66tok/s
    In$10Out$50/M tok

    vs Claude Opus 5.5: +4.6 quality · 2.5× price

Overview

Lab
Thinking Machines Lab
OpenAI
Anthropic
Anthropic
Released
Jul 15, 2026
Sep 3, 2026
Sep 22, 2026
Sep 1, 2026
Weights
Open
Proprietary
Proprietary
Proprietary
Input price
$/M tok
$1.00Best
$10
$4.00
$10
Output price
$/M tok
$4.05Best
$50
$20
$50
Blended price
$/M tok · 3:1 in:out
$1.762Best
$20
$8.00
$20
Output speed
tok/s
184Best
52
92
66
Context
tokens
1MBest
1MBest
1MBest
1MBest

Quality by category

0–100 within each category (100 = best tracked model). Rank is among all models ranked there. Click a row to focus it.

39.3±5.4
#46/103Mixed
86.2±4.5
#4/103Verified
96.9±3.4Best
#1/103Mixedbest value
87.6±3.7
#3/103Mixed
63.7±3.6
#38/146Mixed
92.1±5.3
#4/146Verified
93.0±4.3
#3/146Verifiedbest value
97.6±3.5Best
#1/146Verifiedbest value
52.3±4.2
#40/82Mixed
98.9±3.0Best
#1/82Verifiedbest value
94.5±4.8
#2/82Verifiedbest value
87.4±7.3
#3/82Verified
64.6±3.6
#39/182Mixed
93.5±3.7
#4/182Verified
99.9±2.6Best
#1/182Verifiedbest value
95.7±3.7
#2/182Verified
42.5±4.6
#52/173Mixed
81.6±4.6
#15/173Mixed
99.6±4.1Best
#1/173Verifiedbest value
89.6±5.8
#2/173Verified

Writing & chat benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

MMMLU
day 0
~#2/5~91.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/5~92.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/5~92.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
Benchmarks in other categories (4)

Coding benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

LiveCodeBench
third-party
~#2/20~92.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks

Vision benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

MMMU
day 0
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/8~91.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/8~91.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/8~91.2%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks

Hard reasoning benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

#1/2497.1%Lab-reported
thinkingmachines.ai · 2026-07-15
~#2/25~96.9%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/25~96.7%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/25~96.9%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks

Agents benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

~#2/116~98.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/116~98.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/116~98.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#10/12~69.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#3/12~83.4%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/12~84.6%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/12~84.6%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~last/5below measured range (<47.5%)Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/5~58.7%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
Not comparable across labs (2)