Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash

GPT-5.1 leads Ling 3.0 Flash on coding, 40.4 to 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 82.3x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.1OpenAI
Coding
40.4
Overall
55.0
Output $/M
$10.00
14
Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
29.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.1215
1
vs boards won of 15 shared

GPT-5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.1 for coding: it scores 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash.

Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 82.3x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $1.02).

Shared results
15
GPT-5.1 only
86
Ling 3.0 Flash only
9
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.1 40.4 from 3 benchmarks, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 7.5 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.1 24.6% against Ling 3.0 Flash 2.9%, 21.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.1 $10.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 82.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.1 takes 400K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.1BarsLing 3.0 FlashTies
Coding31
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Knowledge50
General20
All shared boards141
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
SWE-bench Verified66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev1396Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
AA Coding Index49.450.6Ling 3.0 Flash
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)86.5%84.0%GPT-5.1
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%65.2%GPT-5.1
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)24.6%2.9%GPT-5.1
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured50.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured27.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)86.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
SciCodeNot measured42.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)45.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Terminal-Bench47.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
GSO-Bench13.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
WeirdML60.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1453Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1454Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1307Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1421Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index24.720.1GPT-5.1
Epoch Capabilities Index149.8Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured19.3Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured30.3%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured25.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
τ²-Bench Telecom81.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
DeepResearch Bench42.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Vending-Bench 2$1,473Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond86.6%84.8%GPT-5.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)83.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)87.3%85.5%GPT-5.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.5%23.7%GPT-5.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)87.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
ARC-AGI-217.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
SimpleBench53.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Chess puzzles42.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Mystery game puzzles19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
VPCT58.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1457Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1470Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1462Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1264Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1272Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AIME93.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)93.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
AA Math Index94.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)94.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME88.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1446Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1449Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro86.4%82.0%GPT-5.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)85.7%79.7%GPT-5.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)73.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.8%61.9%GPT-5.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.9%70.7%GPT-5.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)61.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)52.7%32.3%GPT-5.1
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1459Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1456Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1459Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1187Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1163Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1178Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1204Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D1060Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1170Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: SVG1149Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1119Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)43.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)88.1%80.9%GPT-5.1
IFBench72.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.0%73.0%GPT-5.1
DTBench90.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMCA43.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench23.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
CL-bench Life17.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1427Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision1250Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1451Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1495Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1438Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1453Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1401Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1450Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1433Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1435Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1440Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1450Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1448Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1428Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1415Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: English1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1270Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1255Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1263Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1266Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
LMArena Document1403Not measuredOnly GPT-5.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.1Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.1$0.0063Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0001Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.1$0.092Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0024Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.1$0.350Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0093Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.1inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash
MakerOpenAIinclusionAI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 13, 2025July 23, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.0405
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.1215
Coding index40.429.6
Independent measurements behind it32
Cost per solved task$1.02$0.05
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.1 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?

Pick GPT-5.1 for coding: it scores 40.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash. Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 82.3x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $1.02).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5.1 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.1 costs $1.02 and Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5.1, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.1's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Ling 3.0 Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-1-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash" title="GPT-5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-1-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash</a></p>