Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) benchmark

Name: Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) (thinkingmachines) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) wins on output price at $2.03/1M. Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the larger context window (1M tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Workhorse Anthropic model: most of Opus coding quality at a mid-tier price.

Elo 1,524$15/1M out

thinkingmachines

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Auto-discovered from OpenRouter (thinkingmachines/inkling:batch). Preview until a second source matches.

$2.025/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs GPT-5

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (8)vsThinking Machines: Inkling (batch) (2)

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 8W (80%)Overall: Claude Sonnet 4.5Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 2W (20%)

← Claude Sonnet 4.5Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,524vs—

Coding Elo

1,531vs—

SWE-bench

70.1%vs—

LiveBench

67.4%vs—

GPQA Diamond

80.2%vs—

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 5WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 0W

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

88 tok/svs—

Time to first token

240 msvs—

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 2WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 0W

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$2.03/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$0.5/1M

Context window

1Mvs524k

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 1WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 2W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageClaude Sonnet 4.5 5/6

Preference Elo

No shared data

Throughput Speed

No shared data

Price Efficiency

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

$12.97/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,524

EloHigh is better

—

Code Elo

High is better

1,531

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

67.4%

LiveBenchHigh is better

—

SWE-bench

High is better

70.1%

SWE-benchHigh is better

—

GPQA

High is better

80.2%

GPQAHigh is better

—

TTFT

Low is better

240 ms

TTFTLow is better

—

Speed

High is better

88 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

—

In $

Low is better

$3/1M

In $Low is better

$0.5/1M+500%

Out $

Low is better

$15/1M

Out $Low is better

$2.03/1M+641%

Context

High is better

+91%1M

ContextHigh is better

524k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 85% with Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

Claude Sonnet 4.5$330.00 / mo

In: $105.00Out: $225.00

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)$47.88 / mo

In: $17.50Out: $30.38

Estimated Cost Delta

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) is estimated to save $282.13/month ($3,386/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch):Pick Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) when you are optimizing output cost.
2
Claude Sonnet 4.5:Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 for million-token RAG or long-document jobs.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatThinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Lower output list price ($2.03/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGClaude Sonnet 4.5

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionClaude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)	Lower output list price ($2.03/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchFeb 18, 2026

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Most of Opus 4.5 coding at a mid-tier price. Sonnet 5 replaced it as the buy; 4.5 remains a compare baseline.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/claude-sonnet-4-5-vs-inkling-batch/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Anthropic

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Elo 1,524

LiveBench67.4%

SWE-bench70.1%

Speed88 tok/s

Output cost$15/1M

thinkingmachines

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost$2.03/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) output tokens are $2.03/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts 1M tokens versus 524k.
Can I self-host either model?: Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Claude Sonnet 4.5 matchups →|All Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) matchups →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 4 (previous sonnet)Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5 (next sonnet)Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (8)vsThinking Machines: Inkling (batch) (2)

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 8W (80%)Overall: Claude Sonnet 4.5Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 2W (20%)

← Claude Sonnet 4.5Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) →

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,524vs—

Coding Elo

1,531vs—

SWE-bench

70.1%vs—

LiveBench

67.4%vs—

GPQA Diamond

80.2%vs—

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 5WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 0W

Claude Sonnet 4.5 (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

88 tok/svs—

Time to first token

240 msvs—

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 2WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 0W

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$15/1Mvs$2.03/1M

Input price

$3/1Mvs$0.5/1M

Context window

1Mvs524k

Claude Sonnet 4.5: 1WThinking Machines: Inkling (batch): 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatThinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Lower output list price ($2.03/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGClaude Sonnet 4.5

Larger window (1M).

Screenshots / visionClaude Sonnet 4.5

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)	Lower output list price ($2.03/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Larger window (1M).
Screenshots / vision	Claude Sonnet 4.5	Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) output tokens are $2.03/1M versus $15/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.5 accepts 1M tokens versus 524k.

Can I self-host either model?

Neither model is marked open-weights here. You are comparing hosted APIs.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch) Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

No shared data

No shared data

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

No shared data

No shared data

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Claude Sonnet 4.5 is the previous workhorse — still a valid vs baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Claude Sonnet 4.5

Thinking Machines: Inkling (batch)

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons