Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) 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.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 26.1% more intelligence, 76.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 17.4% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.6 | 41.1 | +26.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 26.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,222.12 | $1,014.56 | −76.0% Ling 3.1 Flash is 76.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.52s | 13.64s | −17.4% Ling 3.1 Flash is 17.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.50 / $9.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- 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 (High)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/gemini-3-5-flash/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill