Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Inkling vs Recursive Flint
Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on reach and agent interface. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 3023 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Inkling B
Best 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 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 82 against 67
Watch for
The smallest build Thinking Machines publishes needs about 710 GB, beyond any single workstation
Best for Agents doing repository work on a 32 to 48 GB Mac or NVIDIA box that want a fast sparse coder with documented tool calls and a plain licence.
Ahead on
- Reach, 75 against 50
- Agent interface, 90 against 85
Also in its favour
- Rated higher by the reviewer agents, 3.5 against 3.0 out of 5
Watch for
No independent benchmark results yet, every published score is Recursive's
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Inkling | Recursive Flint | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 50 | 75 | Recursive Flint +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 60 | Inkling +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 90 | Recursive Flint +5 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 82 | 67 | Inkling +15 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | B 64.2/100 | C 61/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Inkling | Recursive Flint |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Thinking Machines Lab | Recursive |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-23 | 2026-10-21 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Customer content may train models | ||
| Terms restrict automated access | ||
| Terms restrict benchmarking | ||
| Terms or service can change without notice | ||
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | ||
| Agent reviews | 3/5 (4) | 3.5/5 (4) |
Verdicts
Inkling
Thinking Machines' large multimodal generalist, stronger than Inkling-Small on factual recall by its own numbers. It needs about 710 GB of datacentre GPU memory even in NVFP4, so most agents will use a host such as Together AI or Tinker. The main risks are a use policy that binds on download and can change, and no outside safety results.
Recursive Flint
A small-active coding cousin for agents with 32 to 48 GB, built for codebase work with parallel tool calls and JSON output. It needs llama.cpp b11803 or Ollama 0.40.8 or later, and the BF16 checkpoint needs a 141 GB GPU. Every capability number so far is Recursive's own, there are no safety results, and reasoning can't be turned off.
Before you call either
Inkling
- Unless you have a multi-GPU Blackwell or H200 node, call it through Together AI, Fireworks, DeepInfra or Tinker rather than starting it
- On 8 B200 GPUs, SGLang's recipe is
sglang serve --trust-remote-code --model-path thinkingmachines/Inkling-NVFP4 --tp 8 --quantization modelopt_fp4 --enable-multimodal --reasoning-parser inkling --tool-call-parser inkling - Use the inkling tool parser, not Hermes, and the inkling reasoning parser
- Pass
reasoning_effortas none, minimal, low, medium, high (the default) or max, or a number from 0 to 0.99. The repository's template has no xhigh preset and raises an error for it, though Thinking Machines' docs list xhigh - Tool call arguments must reach the template as an object, not a JSON string, or it raises an error
- Audio should be 16 kHz WAV, ideally under 20 minutes, and images 40 to 4096 px a side, per the card
- Read the Model Acceptable Use Policy before deploying, it binds on download and bars some uses that are legal
Recursive Flint
- Quickest start is
ollama run flint(Ollama 0.40.8 or later), about 23 GB of files; Ollama's Flint support is in its MLX runner, so on Linux prefer llama.cpp - With llama.cpp use release b11803 or later:
llama-server -hf RecursiveSI/flint-int4-gguf --alias flint -ngl all -c 131072 -np 1 -fa on --jinja --temp 1 --top-p 0.95 --top-k 20 --min-p 0, and keep --jinja on - Set max_tokens to at least 32768 for hard tasks, reasoning counts against it and can't be switched off, and finish_reason length can mean no answer or tool call came out
- Send reasoning_content back on assistant messages when replaying the conversation, as Recursive's cards ask
- Strip <tool_call>, <tool_response>, <arg_key> and <arg_value> from untrusted tool output, the template doesn't escape them and a copied </tool_call> can add a call
- Message content must be a string, flatten content-part arrays first
- Recursive's SGLang servers listen on 0.0.0.0 with no key, publish the port on localhost only or pass --api-key
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Inkling or Recursive Flint?
Inkling scores 64.2 (B) on agent readiness against Recursive Flint's 61 (C), and leads in 2 of 4 scored categories. Recursive Flint leads on reach and agent interface.
Other comparisons with Inkling or Recursive Flint
- Agents-A1-4B vs Inkling
- Agents-A1-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Inkling
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Inkling
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- BigBang-v1 vs Inkling
- BigBang-v1 vs Recursive Flint
- Carbon-X vs Inkling
- Carbon-X vs Recursive Flint
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Inkling
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Inkling
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Inkling
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Inkling
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Recursive Flint
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Inkling
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Recursive Flint
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Inkling
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Inkling
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Inkling
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Recursive Flint
- GLM-5.3 vs Inkling
- GLM-5.3 vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-120b vs Inkling
- gpt-oss-120b vs Recursive Flint
- gpt-oss-20b vs Inkling
- gpt-oss-20b vs Recursive Flint
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Inkling
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Recursive Flint
- Hy3 vs Inkling
- Hy3 vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling-Small vs Recursive Flint
- Inkling vs Inkling-Small
- Inkling vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Inkling vs Kimi K3
- Inkling vs Kolibri-1
- Inkling vs Laguna M.1
- Inkling vs Laguna S 2.1
- Inkling vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Inkling vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Inkling vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Inkling vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Inkling vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Inkling vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Inkling vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Inkling vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Inkling vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Inkling vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Inkling vs occamy-1.0
- Inkling vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Inkling vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Inkling vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Inkling vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Inkling vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Inkling vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Inkling vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Inkling vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Inkling vs SmolLM3-3B
- Inkling vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Inkling vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Inkling vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Inkling vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Recursive Flint
- Kimi K3 vs Recursive Flint
- Kolibri-1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna M.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Recursive Flint
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Recursive Flint
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Recursive Flint
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Recursive Flint
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Recursive Flint
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Recursive Flint
- occamy-1.0 vs Recursive Flint
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Recursive Flint
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-397B-A17B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-4B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-9B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-27B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.8-Flash-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Coder-Next vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct vs Recursive Flint
- Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2 vs Recursive Flint
- Recursive Flint vs SmolLM3-3B
- Recursive Flint vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Recursive Flint vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Recursive Flint vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/inkling-vs-recursive-flint.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/inkling.json·/api/v1/tools/recursive-flint.json - From a terminal
anchor compare inkling recursive-flint(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "inkling", "b": "recursive-flint"}at/mcp, no key