Inkling vs GLM 5
At a Glance
| Compare | InklingThinking Machines Lab |  GLM 5Z.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | #34 of 4645.4 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #18 of 44$0.090 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | #28 of 3848.1 score · 3/3 sources · complete | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.95Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $0.60Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $4.05Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 | $1.92Openrouter ↗ · Aug 28, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,049K | 203K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,439.68100% of row best · rating · inkling; 95% CI [1434.76600975, 1444.58550789]; votes 25922; rank 67 | 1,446.27100% of row best · rating · glm-5; 95% CI [1441.95071870, 1450.59229773]; votes 27605; rank 51 |
| ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified | 79.4196% of row best · points · Inkling · 5,785 output tokens / case | 82.89100% of row best · points · GLM-5 · 15,496 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 1 tie | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Inkling | GLM-5 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Thinking Machines Lab | Z.ai |
| Family | Inkling | Glm 5 |
| Model | Inkling | GLM-5 |
| Version | Inkling | GLM-5 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-07-15 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,049K | 203K |
| Total parameters | 975B | 753.9B |
| Active parameters | 41B | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | mit |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | agents, chat, coding, generation, reasoning, tools, vision | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Inkling Capabilities
GLM 5 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
 GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
InklingThinking Machines Lab | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
 Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
InklingThinking Machines Lab | vs | GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
 Hy4 previewTencent | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
 Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | vs | InklingThinking Machines Lab | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Inkling vs GLM 5 FAQs
Is Inkling or GLM 5 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Inkling and GLM 5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Inkling or GLM 5?+
Inkling is $0.95 and GLM 5 is $0.60 per million tokens, so GLM 5 is cheaper on this metric. Inkling is $4.05 and GLM 5 is $1.92 per million tokens, so GLM 5 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Inkling or GLM 5?+
Inkling has the larger sourced context window. Inkling supports 1,049K and GLM 5 supports 203K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Inkling or GLM 5?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Inkling or GLM 5 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Inkling is open weight; GLM 5 is open weight.
Can Inkling and GLM 5 understand images?+
Inkling is documented with image input; GLM 5 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Inkling or GLM 5?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Inkling is — and GLM 5 is —.
Do Inkling and GLM 5 support reasoning and tool use?+
Inkling: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GLM 5: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Inkling or GLM 5?+
Inkling has 4 sourced provider routes; GLM 5 has 4, a tie.
Which offers better value, Inkling or GLM 5?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.