Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash
Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 47.9% less intelligence, 12.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 717.6% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 21.4 | −47.9% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 47.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $1,145.36 | +12.9% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 12.9% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.56s | 110.87s | +717.6% Qwen3.6 27B (Reasonin… is 717.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.60 / $3.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
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.
- Qwen3.6 27B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Ling 3.1 FlashQwen3.6 27B (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/qwen3-6-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/qwen3-6-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill