GLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash

GLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash. A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

Z AIGLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning)Not ranked · benchmark data missing
Intelligence
22.40
Total cost
-
InclusionAILing 3.1 FlashOff the frontier
Intelligence
41.10
Total cost
$1015
Verdict

Comparison incomplete

A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

MetricGLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning)Ling 3.1 FlashDifference
Intelligence (higher is better)22.441.1+83.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 83.5% more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)Not reported$1,014.56— not comparable
End-to-end time (lower is better)3.86s13.64s+253.4% Ling 3.1 Flash is 253.4% slower
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)$1.40 / $4.40$0.30 / $0.90
Input modalitiesTextText
Open this matchup in the interactive pickerGLM-5.2 (Non-reasoning): what beats itLing 3.1 Flash: what beats it
Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2-non-reasoning/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-2-non-reasoning/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill