Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI or MiMo-V2.6-Pro by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro
MiMo-V2.6-Pro vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019: 5.5% more intelligence, 86.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 46.3 | +5.5% MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 5.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,551.81 | $206.66 | −86.7% MiMo-V2.6-Pro is 86.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 48.29s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.43 / $0.87 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
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-V2.6-Pro is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019MiMo-V2.6-ProToday'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-v2-6-pro · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/mimo-v2-6-pro?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill