Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning) by Anthropic 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 24.2 points higher (41.1 vs 16.9) but costs 1.7× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $594; both premium class). Pick Ling 3.1 Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning).
| Metric | Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.9 | 41.1 | +143.2% Ling 3.1 Flash is 2.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $594.08 | $1,014.56 | +70.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 70.8% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 23.70s | 13.56s | −42.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 42.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning): 143.2% more intelligence, 70.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 42.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Claude 4.5 Haiku (Reasoning)Ling 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/claude-4-5-haiku-reasoning/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-4-5-haiku-reasoning/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill