STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

Inkling-Small vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder leads Inkling-Small by 29.4 points on StealthMark, 57.0 to 27.6. It leads on all 9 benchmarks. Muse Wonder scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in reflections.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
All results ↗

Overall StealthMark

27.6/100Overall rank 43/53
57.0/100Overall rank 10/53

General Intelligence

25.5/100
53.1/100

Visual Intelligence

31.1/100
64.0/100

Reasoning efficiency

On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.

Single-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens on a single problem

Multi-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens across connected steps, as in agentic workflows

  • Inkling-Small

Open or local

Open modelApache 2.0

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • Inkling-Small
  • Muse Wonder
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

Both take about 1M tokens of context.

  • Inkling-Small
  • Muse Wonder
  • Other models
  • Median
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
Inkling-Small: No list priceMuse Wonder: $20$4 input
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
Inkling-Small: 1MTiedMuse Wonder: 1MTied
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
Inkling-Small: Not measuredMuse Wonder: 570tokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
Inkling-Small: 276B12B activeMuse Wonder: Not disclosed
Developer
Thinking Machines LabMeta
Released
Not published12 Oct 2026
Origin
Not publishedUnited States
Input → output
Text, image, audio → textText, image, video, audio, PDF → text
Architecture
42-layer decoder-only transformer with sparse mixture-of-experts feed-forward (6 of 256 routed experts plus 2 shared per token); hybrid local and global attention; natively multimodal with a hierarchical patch image encoder and discrete-token audioNot published

Full datasheets, every price and sourceInkling-Small ↗Muse Wonder ↗

Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Inkling-Small 30.2/100Rank 29/49

Survived 0 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 38 ptsTurn 17 / 20

Muse Wonder 52.3/100Rank 17/49

Survived 0 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 311 ptsTurn 17 / 20

Points per level

LevelInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Level 1Second Thoughts
9 ptsOut of lives
16 ptsOut of lives
Level 2Pressure Pot
6 ptsOut of lives
10 ptsOut of lives
Level 3Hide or Flight
8 ptsOut of lives
11 ptsOut of lives

Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Inkling-Small 34.7/100Rank 34/50

Cleared 3 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 518 ptsTurn 40 / 40

Muse Wonder 67.0/100Rank 19/50

Cleared 5 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 520.6 ptsTurn 27 / 40

Points per level

LevelInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
5.2 ptsCleared
Level 2Crossfeed
9.8 ptsCleared
9 ptsCleared
Level 3Relay vault
2.8 ptsFinished early
18.8 ptsCleared
Level 4Passing bay
8 ptsFinished early
17.8 ptsClearedFinished early · 1 beacon left
Level 5Second thoughts
18 ptsCleared
20.6 ptsCleared

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗

The judgment

Inkling-Small

The sphere's apparent floor support, separate dark feature and broad paint ordering justify partial state credit. The major weakness is the largely missing mirror system: isolated side images and faint floor echoes do not establish repeated virtual rooms or curved spherical mapping. Downward framing, the oversized frontal panel, unresolved paint transport and satin surface appearance remain distinct limitations.

Muse Wonder

The flattened cyan cap, separate airborne black blob and crimson droplets support much of the contact sequence, although crimson adhesion and forward carriage remain unresolved. Main-sphere placement is broadly compatible with the prescribed view. Sparse isolated mirror images replace the defining repeated room structure and curved nested reflections. The crimson mass is visibly oversized, and the top-center lamp image is missing.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
State at 600 ms14.0/2522.0/25
Camera and placement3.0/1512.0/15
Reflections8.0/12021.5/120
Materials and scale2.5/107.5/10
Floor-damage reward0.0/100.0/10

Benchmark task

A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.

Selfie

Different task instructions

Visual construction and creative interpretation.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

The faces and dripping caps communicate a cute mushroom scene, but simple construction and weak spatial relationships limit the result. The defining foot-stamping action is unresolved, the flattering portrait is smaller than its painter, and the requested material contrasts are only partly conveyed.

Muse Wonder

An appealing, coherent cartoon with a readable effortful expression and clear forefeet gripping the trunk. Soft colours and controlled contours support its tenderness. Smooth ears, stiff foreleg construction, limited surface texture and uncertain seed contact keep the execution below intricate illustration quality.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Task & likeness2.5/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction1.5/107.0/10
Space & placement3.5/107.5/10
Light & reflections3.0/107.0/10
Purposeful detail4.5/107.5/10
Artistry & character3.0/106.5/10
Materials & effects3.5/106.5/10
Visual integrity2.0/108.0/10

Benchmark task

Inkling-Small

Character scenes test expression, anatomy, materials and coherent visual construction.

Muse Wonder

A small elephant protecting a delicate seed tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting organic materials.

Mona Lisa

Different task instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

A recognizable but rudimentary Mona Lisa interpretation. Facial shading and subdued colors provide coherence, while the frontal blocklike torso, unresolved wrists, fingerless hands and shallow landscape substantially limit likeness, construction and finish.

Muse Wonder

A competent illustrative interpretation with controlled curves, readable details and coherent depth layers. Facial, hair and garment shading demonstrate more development than basic construction. Replication remains limited by the frontal pose, elongated face and pronounced smile; crowded fingers, weak contact shadows and smooth materials constrain anatomical and painterly conviction.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Task & likeness2.5/105.5/10
Anatomy & construction2.5/105.5/10
Space & placement3.0/105.5/10
Light & reflections2.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail2.0/105.5/10
Artistry & character2.5/105.5/10
Materials & effects2.0/105.0/10
Visual integrity3.0/106.5/10

Benchmark task

An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.

Beach

Different task instructions

Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

A recognizable sunset beach with a clear focal sun and appealing color transitions. Connected fish silhouettes and layered scenery establish basic coherence. Primitive figures, ambiguous recreation, sparse descriptive detail and weak grounding limit construction and depth. The aligned reflection supplies a useful lighting cue, but shadows and material effects remain underdeveloped.

Muse Wonder

A lively beach illustration with expressive animals, controlled colour transitions and unusually readable accessories. Connected graphic forms make the activities recognizable. Crowded overlaps, compressed depth, schematic joints, weak directional shadows and limited material variation constrain its physical coherence and refinement.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Task & likeness3.5/108.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/106.0/10
Space & placement3.0/106.5/10
Light & reflections3.0/106.5/10
Purposeful detail3.0/109.0/10
Artistry & character3.0/107.0/10
Materials & effects2.5/106.0/10
Visual integrity2.0/107.0/10

Benchmark task

A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.

Ground Truth

Same task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Muse Wonder

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Benchmark task

A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.

Raccoon

Different task instructions

Scene composition and interacting subjects.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

Recognizable animals, readable accessories and an appealing sunset support a coherent basic cartoon. Rounded construction leaves joints, riding support and steering unresolved. Decorative gradients contribute atmosphere, but directional lighting, distinct materials and convincing water displacement are weakly demonstrated.

Muse Wonder

An expressive, coherent cartoon demonstrates the requested riding and steering interaction. Clean contours, differentiated accessories and energetic spray support its appeal. Concealed seated contacts, compressed vehicle perspective and weak directional lighting limit physical resolution despite the detailed presentation.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Task & likeness4.0/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/105.5/10
Space & placement4.0/106.5/10
Light & reflections5.0/104.5/10
Purposeful detail5.5/107.5/10
Artistry & character4.0/105.5/10
Materials & effects5.0/107.0/10
Visual integrity5.0/107.0/10

Benchmark task

A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.

Pelican

Different task instructions

Subject construction and spatial relationships.

The judgment

Inkling-Small

The pelican is immediately recognizable, and its sweeping neck, shaped bill and orderly spokes provide character. Riding remains only partially realized: legs, pedal engagement, steering and seat support cannot be read confidently. Controlled graphic effects add atmosphere, but simplified construction and weak grounding keep the result basic.

Muse Wonder

A controlled, expressive seaside illustration with a distinctive pelican, coherent bicycle geometry and successfully resolved graphic detail. Visible pedal support and plausible occlusion strengthen the riding construction. Aligned wheels and layered scenery establish placement. Limited cast shadows, simplified leg articulation and restrained material modeling constrain its physical finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryInkling-SmallMuse Wonder
Task & likeness4.0/108.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/106.0/10
Space & placement3.0/107.5/10
Light & reflections3.0/105.5/10
Purposeful detail4.5/108.5/10
Artistry & character5.0/107.5/10
Materials & effects4.5/106.0/10
Visual integrity3.0/108.0/10

Benchmark task

A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.