Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by Google 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 18.9 points higher (41.1 vs 22.2) but costs 2.8× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $366; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Ling 3.1 Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 22.2 | 41.1 | +85.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 85.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $365.63 | $1,014.56 | +177.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 2.8× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.69s | 13.61s | +56.6% Ling 3.1 Flash is 56.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $2.50 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 85.1% more intelligence, 177.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 56.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLing 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/gemini-3-5-flash-lite/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash-lite/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill