GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) by OpenAI or Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash scores 4.9 points higher (41.1 vs 36.2) but costs 8.9× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $115; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash when you need intelligence above 36.2, and GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) when 36.2 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 36.2 | 41.1 | +13.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 13.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $114.52 | $1,014.56 | +785.9% Ling 3.1 Flash is 8.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.78s | 13.43s | +98.1% Ling 3.1 Flash is 98.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Low): 13.5% more intelligence, 785.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 98.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- 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-6.1 Terra (Low)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-6-1-terra-low/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-low/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill