Fronset Benchmark

Thinking Machines Inkling at a glance

Good enough on 29/54 tasks at the 90% bar. Best value on 1 task. Best fit for: Financial Analysis & Trading Decisions, Infrastructure & Utility, Long-form Content Generation, Social & Promotional Cont

Provider
OpenRouter
Model name
thinkingmachines/inkling
Cost mode:
Qualifies on
29 / 54 tasks (at 90% bar)
Best value on
1 tasks

Cost vs quality across all tasks

0%25%50%75%100%78910Quality score (7–10)Cost-efficiency vs best value (1.0 = best value)Public Response Generation — quality 7.86, 129.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionVoice Profile Generation — quality 9.03, 37.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Sequence Optimization — quality 8.01, 136.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionModel Specific Prompt Adaptation — quality 8.29, 70.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPromotional Message Generation — quality 8.45, 111.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSection Prompt Generation — quality 8.26, 50.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBatch Text Translation — quality 8.58, 107.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBench Hypothesis Post Generation — quality 8.30, 82.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionContent To Image Prompt Generation — quality 8.78, 46.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionFactual Claim Refinement — quality 8.05, 51.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionStructured Content Summarization — quality 8.29, 90.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionThematic Topic Discovery — quality 7.79, 2.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Section Taxonomy Generation — quality 8.97, this model IS the best-value good-enough option★Research Query Generation — quality 7.34, 161.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionNewsletter Copy Generation — quality 9.05, 15.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionLanguage Identification — quality 9.76, 68.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionBench Article Hypothesis Generation — quality 8.18, 5.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPersona Policy Eligibility Check — quality 8.50, 43.0x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfile Pool Matching — quality 8.07, 50.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionEngagement Opportunity Triage — quality 8.88, 124.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSocial Post Portfolio Selection — quality 8.53, 170.8x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionSubject Configuration Generation — quality 8.69, 21.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionReference Preserving Analytical Writing — quality 8.44, 34.4x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionMulti Perspective Decision Synthesis — quality 8.59, 18.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionTopic Cluster Labeling — quality 8.30, 35.3x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionResearch Region Identification — quality 8.39, 3.1x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionPublication Title Package Generation — quality 8.52, 84.9x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionProfiled Document Analysis — quality 8.36, 14.2x the cost of the best-value good-enough optionCatalyst And Scenario Analysis — quality 8.00, 37.6x the cost of the best-value good-enough option

within ~1.3× of the best-value model · 1.3–2× · >2× · ★ this model is the best-value pick on that task. Top-right = best quadrant. Only tasks where this model qualifies at the 90% bar are plotted.

Per-task breakdown

TaskCategoryQuality (% of best)ConfidenceOverpay
Publication Section Taxonomy Generation ★Long-form Content Generation96%RANKEDbest value
Thematic Topic DiscoveryTopic Organization & Clustering95%MEDIUM2.3x
Research Region IdentificationStructured Data & Fact Extraction95%HIGH3.1x
Bench Article Hypothesis GenerationEvidence-Grounded Hypothesis Generation93%MEDIUM5.3x
Profiled Document AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions94%MEDIUM14x
Newsletter Copy GenerationLong-form Content Generation100%RANKED15x
Multi Perspective Decision SynthesisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions97%HIGH19x
Subject Configuration GenerationFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions100%HIGH21x
Reference Preserving Analytical WritingLong-form Content Generation92%MEDIUM34x
Topic Cluster LabelingTopic Organization & Clustering93%MEDIUM35x
Catalyst And Scenario AnalysisFinancial Analysis & Trading Decisions91%MEDIUM38x
Voice Profile GenerationLong-form Content Generation94%HIGH38x
Persona Policy Eligibility CheckRelevance, Classification & Matching92%MEDIUM43x
Content To Image Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility99%HIGH47x
Section Prompt GenerationInfrastructure & Utility91%MEDIUM50x
Profile Pool MatchingRelevance, Classification & Matching93%MEDIUM51x
Factual Claim RefinementInfrastructure & Utility93%MEDIUM52x
Language IdentificationRelevance, Classification & Matching96%MEDIUM68x
Model Specific Prompt AdaptationInfrastructure & Utility93%MEDIUM71x
Bench Hypothesis Post GenerationSocial & Promotional Content94%HIGH82x
Publication Title Package GenerationContent Summarization & Synthesis93%RANKED85x
Structured Content SummarizationContent Summarization & Synthesis92%HIGH90x
Batch Text TranslationInfrastructure & Utility93%MEDIUM108x
Promotional Message GenerationSocial & Promotional Content99%RANKED111x
Engagement Opportunity Triage bestRelevance, Classification & Matching100%RANKED124x
Public Response GenerationSocial & Promotional Content93%MEDIUM129x
Topic Sequence OptimizationTopic Organization & Clustering90%HIGH136x
Research Query GenerationInfrastructure & Utility93%MEDIUM162x
Social Post Portfolio SelectionRelevance, Classification & Matching98%HIGH171x

Overpay — how much more you pay by running this model instead of the best-value model that clears the quality bar on that task (marked ★). "16x" means you overpay 16× — the same output for 16× the best-value good-enough option; ★ means this model is that option (no overpayment). Confidence — how sure we are about the quality score (more judgments + more agreement = higher confidence): RANKED many independent judges scored this model's outputs and their agreement is very high (most confident) — HIGH many judges have scored it and they mostly agree (well-pinned) — MEDIUM enough judges have weighed in to publish, but they disagree more than we'd like (treat with a small grain of salt). LOW-confidence cells are hidden everywhere on the site. See the methodology for the exact thresholds.