Ling 3.1 Flash vs Solar Mini 4
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Solar Mini 4 by Upstage? 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 17.0 points higher (41.1 vs 24.1) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $502; both premium class). Pick Ling 3.1 Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Solar Mini 4.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Solar Mini 4 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 24.1 | −41.4% Solar Mini 4 is 41.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $502.02 | −50.5% Solar Mini 4 is 50.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.66s | 27.46s | +101.0% Solar Mini 4 is 101.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.10 / $0.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Solar Mini 4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 41.4% less intelligence, 50.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 101.0% 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.
- Solar Mini 4 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Ling 3.1 FlashSolar Mini 4Today'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/solar-mini4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/solar-mini4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill