GPT-6 Luna (Max) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Luna (Max) 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.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash scores 3.0 points higher (41.1 vs 38.1) but costs 8.3× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $122; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash when you need intelligence above 38.1, and GPT-6 Luna (Max) when 38.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Max) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 38.1 | 41.1 | +7.9% Ling 3.1 Flash is 7.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $122.05 | $1,014.56 | +731.3% Ling 3.1 Flash is 8.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 86.79s | 13.56s | −84.4% Ling 3.1 Flash is 84.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna (Max): 7.9% more intelligence, 731.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 84.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Max) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 Luna (Max)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-luna/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill