Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick

Ling 3.1 Flash leads Llama 4 Maverick on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 41.1 to 9.3, and Ling 3.1 Flash costs 4.4x less per output token ($0.225 vs $1.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

Ling 3.1 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.225
4
Llama 4 MaverickMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
21.8
Output $/M
$1.00
0
vs boards won of 4 shared

Ling 3.1 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 4.4x cheaper ($0.225 vs $1.00 per million).

Shared results
4
Ling 3.1 Flash only
0
Llama 4 Maverick only
81
Like-for-like categories
4 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
Ling 3.1 Flash not benchmarked, Llama 4 Maverick not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 34.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run): Ling 3.1 Flash 39.4% against Llama 4 Maverick 4.9%, 34.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.225 against Llama 4 Maverick $1.00 per million output tokens, 4.4x apart.
Context window
Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens, Llama 4 Maverick 524K.

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
CategoryLing 3.1 FlashBarsLlama 4 MaverickTies
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
General10
All shared boards40
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured15.6%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured21.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured16.3Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured47.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured39.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SciCode54.1%31.7%Ling 3.1 Flash
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.8%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
WeirdMLNot measured24.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
ALE-BenchNot measured173.0Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1301Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1299Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AA Intelligence Index41.19.3Ling 3.1 Flash
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured132.2Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.6Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured17.8%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured69.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured71.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured67.1%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)39.4%4.9%Ling 3.1 Flash
ARC-AGINot measured4.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
SimpleBenchNot measured27.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1281Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1259Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1295Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1134Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1164Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured55.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
AIMENot measured25.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured85.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured92.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AA Math IndexNot measured19.3Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured19.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1299Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1295Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
MMLU ProNot measured79.4%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured77.8%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured49.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured66.6%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured58.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured36.5%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
GeoBenchNot measured52.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1288Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1275Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1286Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1260Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured871Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured897Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured837Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured882Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured900Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured879Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured35.7%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured54.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
IFBenchNot measured43.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.0%50.0%Ling 3.1 Flash
DTBenchNot measured61.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMCANot measured15.9%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured46.2%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.0%Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena TextNot measured1287Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1267Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1266Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1142Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1303Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1269Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1277Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1291Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1206Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1203Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1259Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1293Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1286Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1275Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1289Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1280Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1277Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1250Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1150Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1141Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1143Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1100Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1099Only Llama 4 Maverick measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashLlama 4 MaverickLeader
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

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.0002Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick$0.0008Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.0044Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick$0.021Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.017Fits in one request
Llama 4 Maverick$0.080Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 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 Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Maverick
SpecificationinclusionAI Ling 3.1 FlashMeta Llama 4 Maverick
MakerinclusionAIMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 2, 2026April 5, 2025
Context window262K524K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.35
Output $/Mtok$0.225$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.491
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than Llama 4 Maverick for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 4.4x cheaper ($0.225 vs $1.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick?

Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.225 per million output tokens; Llama 4 Maverick costs $0.35 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for Llama 4 Maverick only.

Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick, with 524K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.1 Flash vs Llama 4 Maverick comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Ling 3.1 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 4 Maverick's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next