GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GLM-5.3-Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash: 1.7% less intelligence, 232.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 65.3% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | GLM-5.3-Flash | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.8 | 41.1 | −1.7% Ling 3.1 Flash is 1.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $305.52 | $1,014.56 | +232.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 3.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 39.33s | 13.66s | −65.3% Ling 3.1 Flash is 65.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.50 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
GLM-5.3-FlashLing 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/glm-5-3-flash/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-3-flash/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill