Ling 3.1 Flash vs Reka Flash 3
Ling 3.1 Flash leads Reka Flash 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 41.1 to 6.4, at about the same output price ($0.225 vs $0.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.1 Flash or Reka Flash 3: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for a larger context window (262K against 66K tokens).
- Shared results
- 3
- Ling 3.1 Flash only
- 1
- Reka Flash 3 only
- 9
- 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash leads, 41.1 against 6.4.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens against 66K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.0002, Reka Flash 3 $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.1 Flash not benchmarked, Reka Flash 3 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 83.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Ling 3.1 Flash 83.0% against Reka Flash 3 0.0%, 83.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.1 Flash $0.225 against Reka Flash 3 $0.20 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens, Reka Flash 3 66K.
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 | Reka Flash 3 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 0 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 43.5% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| SciCode | 54.1% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.1 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 41.1 | 6.4 | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| BALROG | Not measured | 29.2% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 52.9% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 39.4% | 4.4% | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 33.7 | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 33.7% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 66.9% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 30.4% | Only Reka Flash 3 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 83.0% | 0.0% | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 46 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Reka Flash 3 | 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 | Reka Flash 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Reka |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | October 2, 2026 | March 12, 2025 |
| Context window | 262K | 66K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.075 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.225 | $0.20 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than Reka Flash 3 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for a larger context window (262K against 66K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash or Reka Flash 3?
Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.225 per million output tokens; Reka Flash 3 costs $0.10 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Reka Flash 3?
Ling 3.1 Flash, with 262K tokens against 66K.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.1 Flash vs Reka Flash 3 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 Reka Flash 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.