Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI or MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) by Xiaomi? 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 1019 scores 17.9 points higher (43.9 vs 26.0) but costs 6.7× as much to run the benchmark ($1552 vs $231; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 when you need intelligence above 26.0, and MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) when 26.0 is enough.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 26.0 | −40.8% MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reason… is 40.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,551.81 | $231.08 | −85.1% MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reason… is 85.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 49.58s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.41 / $1.02 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019: 40.8% less intelligence, 85.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- 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.
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019MiMo-V2.5-Pro (Reasoning)Today'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/ling-3-1-flash-1019/mimo-v2-5-pro · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/mimo-v2-5-pro?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill