Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite by Google or Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 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 1019 scores 21.7 points higher (43.9 vs 22.2) but costs 4.2× as much to run the benchmark ($1552 vs $366; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 when you need intelligence above 22.2, and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite when 22.2 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 22.2 | 43.9 | +97.7% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 97.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $365.63 | $1,551.81 | +324.4% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 4.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 9.51s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| 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 1019 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 97.7% more intelligence, 324.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
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 1019 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteLing 3.1 Flash 1019Today's Pareto 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-1019 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash-lite/ling-3-1-flash-1019?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill