Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI or Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) scores 1.2 points higher (45.1 vs 43.9) but costs 1.1× as much to run the benchmark ($1655 vs $1552; both premium class). Pick Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Ling 3.1 Flash 1019.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 45.1 | +2.7% Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is 2.7% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,551.81 | $1,655.27 | +6.7% Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is 6.7% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 28.35s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $1.25 / $4.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019: 2.7% more intelligence, 6.7% more 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.
- Muse Spark 1.3 (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 1.3 (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-1-3-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/muse-spark-1-3-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill