# Inkling vs Kimi K3 (slim)

> Inkling scores 64.2 (B) to Kimi K3's 62.4 (B) for open-weight models you run yourself. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-vs-kimi-k3.md (~5,650 tokens) · this version ~430 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-vs-kimi-k3.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/inkling-vs-kimi-k3
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-10-21
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Kimi K3's 62.4 (B), and leads in 3 of 5 scored categories. Kimi K3 leads on capability. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

- Inkling: B 64.2, rank #20 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/inkling.min.md
- Kimi K3: B 62.4, rank #29 of 100 open-weight models · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/kimi-k3.min.md
- Inkling, good for Agents calling a hosted open multimodal model with audio input, or teams with a multi-GPU datacentre node who want to run it themselves. Ahead on Risk, 70 against 65; Agent interface, 85 against 65; Documentation and upkeep, 82 against 41. Also Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.0 against 2.3 out of 5.
- Kimi K3, good for Teams with a multi-node GPU cluster who want an open 1M-context agent model for long coding and research work Ahead on Capability, 75 against 60.

| Category | Inkling | Kimi K3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability (35%) | 60 | 75 |
| Reach (25%) | 50 | 50 |
| Risk (20%) | 70 | 65 |
| Agent interface (10%) | 85 | 65 |
| Documentation and upkeep (10%) | 82 | 41 |

| Fact (where they differ) | Inkling | Kimi K3 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Thinking Machines Lab | Moonshot AI |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Kimi K3 License (modified MIT) |
| Last release | 2026-07-23 | 2026-09-02 |
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 2.3/5 (4) |