Grok 4.6 (Medium) vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.6 (Medium) by SpaceXAI 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
Grok 4.6 (Medium) scores 1.7 points higher (42.8 vs 41.1) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($1557 vs $1015; both premium class). Pick Grok 4.6 (Medium) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Ling 3.1 Flash.
| Metric | Grok 4.6 (Medium) | Ling 3.1 Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.8 | 41.1 | −4.0% Ling 3.1 Flash is 4.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,557.04 | $1,014.56 | −34.8% Ling 3.1 Flash is 34.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 31.37s | 13.64s | −56.5% Ling 3.1 Flash is 56.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Grok 4.6 (Medium): 4.0% less intelligence, 34.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 56.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.6 (Medium) 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.
Grok 4.6 (Medium)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/grok-4-6-medium/ling-3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-6-medium/ling-3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill