Ling 3.1 Flash vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Wonder (Max) scores 11.3 points higher (52.4 vs 41.1) but costs 5.7× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $1015; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 41.1, and Ling 3.1 Flash when 41.1 is enough.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 52.4 | +27.5% Muse Wonder (Max) is 27.5% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $5,786.78 | +470.4% Muse Wonder (Max) is 5.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.61s | 40.70s | +199.0% Muse Wonder (Max) is 199.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 27.5% more intelligence, 470.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 199.0% 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.
- Muse Wonder (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Ling 3.1 FlashMuse Wonder (Max)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/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill