The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Grok-3 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 30.4.

xAI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 30.4, ranking #15 overall.

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

Choose Grok-3

  • you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $15.00/M output

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Grok-3
xAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
30.4
#134
51.0
#15
Reasoning
30.1
#133
47.5
#26
Coding
17.5
#129
38.8
#18
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$3.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$15.00 / M
— / M
Context window
128,000
—

Individual benchmarks

5 reported for Grok-3 · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Grok-3 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 Grok-3 specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Grok-3 specifies output context (8,000 tokens).

xAI
Grok-3
Input128,000 tokens
Output8,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Grok-3 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Grok-3 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Grok-3

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Grok-3 was released on 2025-02-17, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 20 months newer than Grok-3.

Grok-3

Feb 17, 2025

1.6 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.6yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Grok-3 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-11-17, while Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Grok-3's training data extends to 2024-11-17, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date.

Grok-3

Nov 2024

Ling 3.1 Flash

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Grok-3 and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Grok-3
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Grok-3 vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Grok-3 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 30.4. Grok-3 is made by xAI 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 Grok-3 compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

Grok-3 scores AIME 2024: 93.3%, AIME 2025: 93.3%, GPQA: 84.6%, LiveCodeBench: 79.4%, MMMU: 78.0%. 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 Grok-3 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Grok-3 supports 128K 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 Grok-3 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (30.4 vs 51.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Grok-3 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Grok-3 is developed by xAI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons