Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) by Alibaba? 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 22.9 points higher (41.1 vs 18.2) but costs 1.1× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $896; both premium class). Pick Ling 3.1 Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning).
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 18.2 | −55.7% Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reas… is 55.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $896.39 | −11.6% Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reas… is 11.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.66s | 46.88s | +243.2% Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reas… is 243.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.38 / $2.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 55.7% less intelligence, 11.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 243.2% 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.
- Qwen3.6 35B A3B (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Ling 3.1 FlashQwen3.6 35B A3B (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/qwen3-6-35b-a3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/qwen3-6-35b-a3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill