Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Medium 3.5
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Mistral Medium 3.5 by Mistral? 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
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 65.5% less intelligence, 24.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 29.5% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 14.2 | −65.5% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 65.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $1,263.80 | +24.6% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 24.6% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.64s | 17.66s | +29.5% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 29.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $1.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Ling 3.1 Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Mistral Medium 3.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Ling 3.1 FlashMistral Medium 3.5Today'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/mistral-medium-3-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/mistral-medium-3-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill