GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) by OpenAI 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 GPT-5.5 (Xhigh): 7.0% more intelligence, 80.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 69.5% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 38.4 | 41.1 | +7.0% Ling 3.1 Flash is 7.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,294.36 | $1,014.56 | −80.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 80.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 44.76s | 13.64s | −69.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 69.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $30.0 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.5 (Xhigh) 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.
GPT-5.5 (Xhigh)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/gpt-5-5/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-5/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill