The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Large 4

Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 4 are closely matched at 51.1 and 46.4 on the LLM Stats Score.

InclusionAI · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 4 are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 51.1 and 46.4.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.1 Flash wins 3; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 5 exact shared results

Choose Mistral Large 4

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Mistral Large 4
Mistral AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.1
#14
46.4
#33
Reasoning
47.7
#25
44.0
#42
Coding
39.2
#17
36.5
#24
Agents
38.3
#11
34.7
#25
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 5
2 of 5
Input price
— / M
$0.68 / M
Output price
— / M
$2.09 / M
Context window
—
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
Mistral Large 4
Tool use
29.0#13
27.2#25
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 15 for Mistral Large 4

5 shared

Ling 3.1 Flash outperforms in 3 benchmarks (CyberGym, Finance Agent v2, Terminal-Bench 4.0), while Mistral Large 4 is better at 2 benchmarks (AutomationBench, SWE Atlas - Codebase QnA).

Ling 3.1 Flash has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Wed Oct 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

490.0B diff

Mistral Large 4 has 490.0B more parameters than Ling 3.1 Flash, making it 87.5% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Mistral AI
Mistral Large 4
1.1Tparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
1050.0B
Mistral Large 4

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Mistral Large 4 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mistral AI
Mistral Large 4
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Oct 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Mistral Large 4 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Mistral Large 4 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Mistral Large 4

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Mistral Large 4 was released on 2026-10-06.

Mistral Large 4 is 0 month newer than Ling 3.1 Flash.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

Mistral Large 4

Oct 6, 2026

1 days ago

6d newer

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 4 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Mistral Large 4
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mistral Large 4.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Mistral Large 4?

Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 4 are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 51.1 and 46.4. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Mistral Large 4 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 4 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 4 scores CyBench: 93.0%, SciCode: 91.8%, CyberGym: 82.0%, Finch (FinWorkBench): 67.4%, ChartQAPro: 63.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 4?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Mistral Large 4 supports 1.0M 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 4?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.1 vs 46.4), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Mistral Large 4?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Mistral Large 4 is developed by Mistral AI.

Related comparisons