The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT-5 High vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 34.0.

OpenAI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 34.0, ranking #15 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose GPT-5 High

  • you want predictable pricing at $1.25/M input and $10.00/M output

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GPT-5 High
OpenAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
34.0
#108
51.0
#15
Reasoning
32.9
#112
47.5
#26
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$1.25 / M
— / M
Output price
$10.00 / M
— / M
Context window
400,000
—

Individual benchmarks

2 reported for GPT-5 High · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

GPT-5 High and Ling 3.1 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only GPT-5 High specifies input context (400,000 tokens). Only GPT-5 High specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

OpenAI
GPT-5 High
Input400,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GPT-5 High supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

GPT-5 High can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GPT-5 High

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-5 High was released on 2025-08-07, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 14 months newer than GPT-5 High.

GPT-5 High

Aug 7, 2025

1.2 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.1yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

GPT-5 High has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-09-30, while Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm GPT-5 High's training data extends to 2024-09-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date.

GPT-5 High

Sep 2024

Ling 3.1 Flash

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GPT-5 High and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT-5 High
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-5 High vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, GPT-5 High or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 34.0. GPT-5 High is made by OpenAI and Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does GPT-5 High compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

GPT-5 High scores AIME 2025: 94.6%, GPQA: 87.3%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the context window sizes for GPT-5 High and Ling 3.1 Flash?

GPT-5 High supports 400K tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between GPT-5 High and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (34.0 vs 51.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GPT-5 High and Ling 3.1 Flash?

GPT-5 High is developed by OpenAI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons