Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) by Anthropic or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh)
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh): 0.2% less intelligence, 543.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 80.1% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.2 | 41.1 | −0.2% Ling 3.1 Flash is 0.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $157.58 | $1,014.56 | +543.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 6.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 68.29s | 13.61s | −80.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 80.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh)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-haiku-5-5-xhigh/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-haiku-5-5-xhigh/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill