Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Qwen3.7 Max by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash
Qwen3.7 Max vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 28.2% less intelligence, 124.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 21.6% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 29.5 | −28.2% Qwen3.7 Max is 28.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $2,277.12 | +124.4% Qwen3.7 Max is 2.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.66s | 16.61s | +21.6% Qwen3.7 Max is 21.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
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.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Ling 3.1 FlashQwen3.7 MaxToday'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/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill