GPT-6 Astra (Low) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Astra (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 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6 Astra (Low) scores 4.7 points higher (45.8 vs 41.1) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($1537 vs $1015; both premium class). Pick GPT-6 Astra (Low) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Ling 3.1 Flash.
| Metric | GPT-6 Astra (Low) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.8 | 41.1 | −10.3% Ling 3.1 Flash is 10.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,536.78 | $1,014.56 | −34.0% Ling 3.1 Flash is 34.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.63s | 13.66s | +17.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 17.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra (Low): 10.3% less intelligence, 34.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 17.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Astra (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- 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 Astra (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-astra-low/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-astra-low/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill