GPT-5 mini (High) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (High) by OpenAI or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash scores 24.3 points higher (41.1 vs 16.8) but costs 5.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $189; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash when you need intelligence above 16.8, and GPT-5 mini (High) when 16.8 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 mini (High) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 41.1 | +144.6% Ling 3.1 Flash is 2.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $1,014.56 | +437.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 5.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 58.72s | 13.66s | −76.7% Ling 3.1 Flash is 76.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5 mini (High): 144.6% more intelligence, 437.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 76.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 mini (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- 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 mini (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/gpt-5-mini/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill