Claude Instant 1.1 vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Claude Instant 1.1 (2023) and Stockmark 2 100B Instruct (2025) are compact production models from Anthropic and Stockmark. Claude Instant 1.1 ships a 100k-token context window, while Stockmark 2 100B Instruct ships a 128k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Stockmark 2 100B Instruct is safer overall; choose Claude Instant 1.1 when provider fit matters.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Claude Instant 1.1 | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | general production evaluation | general production evaluation |
| Decision fit | General | Long context |
| Context window | 100k | 128k |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 shared | 0 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Use Claude Instant 1.1 when your own prompt tests beat the comparison signals; the local data does not show a decisive standalone advantage yet.
- Stockmark 2 100B Instruct has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Stockmark 2 100B Instruct has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and route flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Stockmark 2 100B Instruct for Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Claude Instant 1.1
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Claude Instant 1.1 and Stockmark 2 100B Instruct; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Stockmark 2 100B Instruct and Claude Instant 1.1; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2023-05-11 | 2025-06-01 |
| Context window | 100k | 128k |
| Parameters | — | 100B |
| Architecture | Decoder Only | Decoder Only |
| License | Proprietary | MITOSI-approved |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Weights | Not released | Unknown |
| Code | Unknown | Unknown |
| Commercial use | Commercial use: conditional | Commercial use: permitted |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2023-01 | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Claude Instant 1.1 | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers | - |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Claude Instant 1.1 | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| JSON / Tool use | No | No |
| Structured outputs | No | No |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark scores are currently available for this pair.
Continue comparing
- Claude Instant 1.1 vs Qwen2-7B-Instruct
- ELYZA Japanese Llama 2 13B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- ELYZA Japanese Llama 2 7B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Hunyuan Hy3 Preview vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Claude Instant 1.1 vs Codex 1
- Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5 vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Together AI - Gemma 3n-e4B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Claude Instant 1.1 vs Hunyuan Hy3 Preview
Popular comparisons for Claude Instant 1.1
Popular comparisons for Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Last reviewed: 2026-09-08. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.