The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Large 2

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.4.

InclusionAI · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.4, ranking #15 overall.

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

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

Choose Mistral Large 2

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Mistral Large 2
Mistral AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
7.4
#304
Reasoning
47.5
#26
7.3
#297
Coding
38.8
#18
13.0
#151
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$2.00 / M
Output price
— / M
$6.00 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 5 for Mistral Large 2

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 2don'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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

437.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 437.0B more parameters than Mistral Large 2, making it 355.3% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Mistral AI
Mistral Large 2
123.0Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
123.0B
Mistral Large 2

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Mistral Large 2 specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Mistral Large 2 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mistral AI
Mistral Large 2
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Mistral Large 2 was released on 2024-07-24.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 27 months newer than Mistral Large 2.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

2.2yr newer
Mistral Large 2

Jul 24, 2024

2.2 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 2 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Mistral Large 2
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Large 2.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Mistral Large 2?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.4. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Mistral Large 2 is made by Mistral AI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Ling 3.1 Flash compare to Mistral Large 2 in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Mistral Large 2 scores GSM8k: 93.0%, HumanEval: 92.0%, MT-Bench: 86.3%, MMLU: 84.0%, MMLU French: 82.8%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 2?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Mistral Large 2 supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 2?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 7.4), licensing (Unknown vs Mistral Research License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 2?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Mistral Large 2 is developed by Mistral AI.

Related comparisons