GPT-5 mini (High) vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (High) by OpenAI or Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 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 1019 scores 27.1 points higher (43.9 vs 16.8) but costs 8.2× as much to run the benchmark ($1552 vs $189; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 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 1019 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 43.9 | +161.3% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 2.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $1,551.81 | +722.5% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 8.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 58.72s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs GPT-5 mini (High): 161.3% more intelligence, 722.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
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 1019 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
GPT-5 mini (High)Ling 3.1 Flash 1019Today's Pareto 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-1019 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/ling-3-1-flash-1019?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill