Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) by Mistral? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash scores 29.8 points higher (41.1 vs 11.3) but costs 24× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $42.5; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash when you need intelligence above 11.3, and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) when 11.3 is enough.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 11.3 | −72.5% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 72.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $42.50 | −95.8% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 95.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.66s | 14.50s | +6.1% Mistral Small 4 (Reas… is 6.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 72.5% less intelligence, 95.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 6.1% slower end-to-end.
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 Small 4 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
Ling 3.1 FlashMistral Small 4 (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/mistral-small-4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/mistral-small-4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill