Ling 3.1 Flash vs Muse Spark Open
Ling 3.1 Flash costs 18.9x less per output token than Muse Spark Open ($0.225 vs $4.25 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.1 Flash or Muse Spark Open: which to pick
Only Muse Spark Open has a coding score, 47.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Ling 3.1 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 18.9x cheaper ($0.225 vs $4.25 per million) and work measured by Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 3
- Ling 3.1 Flash only
- 1
- Muse Spark Open only
- 30
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Muse Spark Open has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Ling 3.1 Flash has a AA Intelligence Index result, 41.1.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Muse Spark Open has a Design Arena: websites result, 1317.
Directional only
General
Vals Index
No call
Only Muse Spark Open has a Vals Index result, 48.6%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Muse Spark Open
Muse Spark Open takes 1.05M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.0002, Muse Spark Open $0.0034 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.1 Flash not benchmarked, Muse Spark Open 47.4 from 4 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 4.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Ling 3.1 Flash 83.0% against Muse Spark Open 78.3%, 4.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.1 Flash $0.225 against Muse Spark Open $4.25 per million output tokens, 18.9x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens, Muse Spark Open 1.05M.
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.
| Category | Ling 3.1 Flash | Bars | Muse Spark Open | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 2 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 73.6% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1528 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 6.6% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 76.2% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 21.2% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| SciCode | 54.1% | 58.4% | Muse Spark Open |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 1590.1 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1529 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1495 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| SWE-Bench Pro V2 | Not measured | 95.0% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 41.1 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.1 Flash measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 155.1 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 80.3% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 36.0% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 18.9% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.3% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 26.3% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.5% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 25.0% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 53.7% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| APEX-Agents | Not measured | 33.4% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 73.7% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 89.0% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 39.4% | 43.9% | Muse Spark Open |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run) | Not measured | 28.0% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MathArena | Not measured | 33.6% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| PRBench Legal | Not measured | 59.8% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1317 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1286 | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 60.3% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | Not measured | 48.6% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 60.2% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 83.0% | 78.3% | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| MultiChallenge | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Muse Spark Open measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Muse Spark Open | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Ling 3.1 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | inclusionAI Ling 3.1 Flash | Meta Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Meta |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 2, 2026 | October 15, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.075 | $1.25 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.225 | $4.25 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 47.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 4 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than Muse Spark Open for coding?
Only Muse Spark Open has a coding score, 47.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Ling 3.1 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 18.9x cheaper ($0.225 vs $4.25 per million) and work measured by Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash or Muse Spark Open?
Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.225 per million output tokens; Muse Spark Open costs $1.25 and $4.25. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Muse Spark Open?
Muse Spark Open, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.1 Flash vs Muse Spark Open comparison based on?
3 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 Muse Spark Open's on 4. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.