Grok 4.7 (High) vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019
Which is better for the money: Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI or Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Grok 4.7 (High) scores 2.4 points higher (46.3 vs 43.9) but costs 2.5× as much to run the benchmark ($3881 vs $1552; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Grok 4.7 (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Ling 3.1 Flash 1019.
| Metric | Grok 4.7 (High) | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.3 | 43.9 | −5.2% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 5.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,880.88 | $1,551.81 | −60.0% Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is 60.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 30.44s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $6.00 | $0.30 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs Grok 4.7 (High): 5.2% less intelligence, 60.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Grok 4.7 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- 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.
Grok 4.7 (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/grok-4-7-high/ling-3-1-flash-1019 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/grok-4-7-high/ling-3-1-flash-1019?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill