Apodex 1.1 vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash scores 14.7 points higher (41.1 vs 26.4) but costs 1.1× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $939; both premium class). Pick Ling 3.1 Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Apodex 1.1.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 41.1 | +55.7% Ling 3.1 Flash is 55.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $1,014.56 | +8.0% Ling 3.1 Flash is 8.0% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 13.64s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Apodex 1.1: 55.7% more intelligence, 8.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Apodex 1.1Ling 3.1 FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill