Ling 3.1 Flash vs Solar Pro 3
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash by InclusionAI or Solar Pro 3 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 33.3 points higher (41.1 vs 7.8) but costs 6.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1015 vs $159; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash when you need intelligence above 7.8, and Solar Pro 3 when 7.8 is enough.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash | Solar Pro 3 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 41.1 | 7.8 | −81.0% Solar Pro 3 is 81.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,014.56 | $159.22 | −84.3% Solar Pro 3 is 84.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.66s | 18.94s | +38.7% Solar Pro 3 is 38.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Solar Pro 3 vs Ling 3.1 Flash: 81.0% less intelligence, 84.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 38.7% 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 Pro 3 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
Ling 3.1 FlashSolar Pro 3Today'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-pro-3 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash/solar-pro-3?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill