
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
Fugu Ultra vs Inkling
Sakana's multi-agent answer to Fusion — frontier ensemble without single-vendor risk. vs A 975B open-weights frontier model — yours to own and run.
Head-to-head verdict: Fugu Ultra wins 37–5.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Fugu Ultra and Inkling, side by side, on 42 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
Fugu Ultra · Dispatched from Agent OS as the panel-ensemble alternative to OpenRouter Fusion. Bench scored by Claude judge against the same 42 prompts as every other model.
Inkling · Benched on GoldieBench one-shot through Tinker's OpenAI-compatible endpoint at medium reasoning effort, then headless-playtested on the same rubric as the whole field. In the Agent OS it's wired into the opencode tab on your own Tinker key — the Ink Machine.
Side-by-side on 50 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
Fugu Ultra
Inkling
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Page
Page
Sim
Sim
Sim
Where Fugu Ultra beat Inkling
The tasks where I gave Fugu Ultra a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Blackhole
Sim
Fugu Ultra 8.5
·
Inkling 2.3
(+6.2)
What I saw: Ultra v2 — gravitational-lensing black hole. Smoke-test PASS (2.2% pixel diff).
Plasma
Visual
Fugu Ultra 8.0
·
Inkling 2.3
(+5.7)
What I saw: Ultra v2 — plasma effect with palette switcher. Smoke-test PASS.
Particleforge
Sim
Fugu Ultra 8.0
·
Inkling 3.2
(+4.8)
What I saw: Ultra v2 (gap-fill) — mouse-gravity particle sculptor. Smoke-test PASS (2.6% diff).
Cloth
Sim
Fugu Ultra 8.0
·
Inkling 3.5
(+4.5)
What I saw: Ultra v2 — verlet cloth sim, drag to deform. Smoke-test PASS.
Crypt
Game
Fugu Ultra 7.0
·
Inkling 2.5
(+4.5)
What I saw: Ultra v2 (gap-fill) — first-person Nordic dungeon. Smoke-test MAYBE (0.4% diff) — pointer-lock FPS; flagged for manual verification.
Where Inkling beat Fugu Ultra
The tasks where I gave Inkling a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Arcade
Game
Inkling 8.2
·
Fugu Ultra 7.0
(+1.2)
What I saw: A polished 3D Breakout in Three.js with a gorgeous gradient title, glowing rainbow brick wall, paddle/ball follow, trail dots and live score badge — clearly renders and is on-brief. Held back from top spot by the loose 2D collision math on a 3D perspective view (paddle bounce/wal…
Webos
Page
Inkling 7.8
·
Fugu Ultra 7.0
(+0.8)
What I saw: Renders cleanly with polished dock, desktop icons, and a functional Terminal window with prompt; drag, close/minimize dots, Paint canvas and localStorage Notes all present per source. Weak point: the title banner is partially hidden behind the window and the empty terminal body l…
Neonblaster
Game
Inkling 7.2
·
Fugu Ultra 6.5
(+0.7)
What I saw: Strong neon HUD/title and clean starfield render with a polished glow aesthetic, and the source covers waves, bosses, power-ups, screen-shake, and synth SFX. However the screenshot shows a sparse, static-looking scene with a tiny player ship and no enemies/action visible, and the…
Matrix
Visual
Inkling 8.4
·
Fugu Ultra 8.0
(+0.4)
· polished neon rain
What I saw: Gorgeous dense glyph rain with katakana/symbol mix, glowing trails, and an Orbitron title that reads beautifully; the hue-shifting green-to-blue gradient is striking but drifts slightly from canonical Matrix green, keeping it just shy of the top.
Fluid
Sim
Inkling 6.8
·
Fugu Ultra 6.5
(+0.3)
What I saw: Renders cleanly with a polished Orbitron title and a dense particle cloud with pleasing color mix, but it reads as a scattered particle sphere rather than convincing swirling fluid motion — the flow field is subtle and the CPU per-particle loop limits it to a generic point cloud …
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
Fugu Ultra
Strengths
- SWE Bench Pro 73.7 · GPQA-D 95.5 · MRCRv2 93.6 — Sakana's published frontier-tier benchmark scores
- Vendor-agnostic ensemble — opt out of specific providers for compliance / export-control
- OpenAI-compatible API at api.sakana.ai — drop-in for existing tooling
Trade-offs
- Panel orchestration adds latency — even a 'pong' burns ~2k orchestration tokens
- Newer than Fusion; less community calibration on long-tail prompts
Inkling
Strengths
- Genuinely open-weights — the full 975B model is public on Hugging Face; run it on your own key, no black box
- Best one-shot builds are 2D / animation / web — a matrix-rain that topped its task (8.4), plus arcade, fractal, aurora and a mini web-OS all judged shippable (7.6–8.2)
- Frontier-class agentic coding for an open model — 77.6% SWE-bench Verified, ahead of Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 1M-token context, native multimodal (text/image/audio), and a controllable thinking-effort dial
Trade-offs
- One-shot 3D games are weak — three.js dungeons/racers render a title screen but no playable scene, like most open models (crypt 2.5)
- Physics and particle sims are hit-or-miss — black-hole, plasma and cloth one-shots often render dark or static (2.3–3.5)
- Not the strongest overall — the closed frontier (Fable 5) still tops the raw benchmarks; Inkling trades peak for ownership
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | Fugu Ultra | Inkling |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Sakana AI | Thinking Machines |
| Context window | 272,000 tokens with the standard rate. Calls exceeding 272K context are billed at the higher 'long-context' rates. | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Price | $5 / 1M input · $30 / 1M output (Fugu Ultra) | $0.33 / M |
| Pricing detail | Sakana's multi-agent orchestration: a single API call internally dispatches to multiple frontier models and synthesises the answer. Subscription plans run $20-$200/mo (Standard / Pro / Max); PAYG is $5/M input + $30/M output for Fugu Ultra. Direct competitor to OpenRouter Fusion's panel approach. | Inkling is open-weights — a 975B-parameter (41B active) Mixture-of-Experts model whose full weights are public on Hugging Face. You run it on your own key through Tinker's OpenAI-compatible endpoint (usage-based, ~$0.33/M sampling, 50% off at launch), or via Together / Fireworks / Modal / Databricks / Baseten. Benched here one-shot at medium reasoning effort via Tinker. |
| Release | 2026-06-15 | 2026-07 |
| Bench coverage | 42/42 scored · avg 7.94/10 | 50/50 scored · avg 6.07/10 |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Across 42 scored shared tasks, Fugu Ultra averaged 7.94/10, beating Inkling's 6.00/10 by 1.95 points. Pick Fugu Ultra when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Fugu Ultra and Inkling both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — teams that want fusion-class quality but need a different vendor risk profile → Fugu Ultra, owning a frontier model instead of renting one — on your own key, pennies per build → Inkling. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — Fugu Ultra vs Inkling
Which is better, Fugu Ultra or Inkling?
On Goldie Bench, Fugu Ultra averages 7.94/10 across the shared tasks, with 6 gold, 3 silver, 7 bronze overall. Inkling averages 6.00/10, with 0 gold, 3 silver, 1 bronze. Fugu Ultra wins the head-to-head 37–5.
How much does Fugu Ultra cost vs Inkling?
Fugu Ultra: Sakana's multi-agent orchestration: a single API call internally dispatches to multiple frontier models and synthesises the answer. Subscription plans run $20-$200/mo (Standard / Pro / Max); PAYG is $5/M input + $30/M output for Fugu Ultra. Direct competitor to OpenRouter Fusion's panel approach. Inkling: Inkling is open-weights — a 975B-parameter (41B active) Mixture-of-Experts model whose full weights are public on Hugging Face. You run it on your own key through Tinker's OpenAI-compatible endpoint (usage-based, ~$0.33/M sampling, 50% off at launch), or via Together / Fireworks / Modal / Databricks / Baseten. Benched here one-shot at medium reasoning effort via Tinker.
What's the context window for Fugu Ultra vs Inkling?
Fugu Ultra has a 272,000 tokens with the standard rate. Calls exceeding 272K context are billed at the higher 'long-context' rates. context window. Inkling has a 1,000,000 tokens context window.
When should I pick Fugu Ultra over Inkling?
Pick Fugu Ultra for: Teams that want Fusion-class quality but need a different vendor risk profile; Operators avoiding export-controlled providers (Sakana emphasises this in their pitch); Deep-research workflows where ensemble verdicts beat single-model answers. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Panel orchestration adds latency — even a 'pong' burns ~2k orchestration tokens; Newer than Fusion; less community calibration on long-tail prompts.
When should I pick Inkling over Fugu Ultra?
Pick Inkling for: Owning a frontier model instead of renting one — on your own key, pennies per build; Generative visuals, data-viz and single-file web builds you want one-shot; A customizable open base you can fine-tune on Tinker for your own domain. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: One-shot 3D games are weak — three.js dungeons/racers render a title screen but no playable scene, like most open models (crypt 2.5); Physics and particle sims are hit-or-miss — black-hole, plasma and cloth one-shots often render dark or static (2.3–3.5); Not the strongest overall — the closed frontier (Fable 5) still tops the raw benchmarks; Inkling trades peak for ownership.
How does Goldie Bench score Fugu Ultra vs Inkling?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
Fugu Ultra vs Fusion Inkling vs Fusion Fugu Ultra vs Hermes MoA Inkling vs Hermes MoA Fugu Ultra vs GPT-5.6 Sol Inkling vs GPT-5.6 Sol Fugu Ultra vs Claude Fable 5 Inkling vs Claude Fable 5Full model pages: Fugu Ultra · Inkling · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly














































