Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI or Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash 1019
Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019: 23.2% less intelligence, 11.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 33.7 | −23.2% Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) is 23.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,551.81 | $1,737.18 | +11.9% Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) is 11.9% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 21.59s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $1.25 / $4.25 | |
| 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.
- Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019Muse Spark 1.1 (Xhigh)Today'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/ling-3-1-flash-1019/muse-spark-1-1 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/muse-spark-1-1?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill