The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs o1

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 20.9.

InclusionAI · OpenAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 20.9, 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 o1

  • you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
o1
OpenAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
20.9
#207
Reasoning
47.5
#26
21.3
#197
Coding
38.8
#18
4.5
#220
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$15.00 / M
Output price
— / M
$60.00 / M
Context window
—
200,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
o1
Tool use
29.0#16
12.7#113
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 19 for o1

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and o1don'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 o1 specifies input context (200,000 tokens). Only o1 specifies output context (100,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
OpenAI
o1
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Sat Oct 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while o1 was released on 2024-12-17.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 22 months newer than o1.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.8yr newer
o1

Dec 17, 2024

1.8 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 o1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
o1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs o1.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or o1?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 20.9. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and o1 is made by OpenAI. 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 o1 in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. o1 scores GSM8k: 97.1%, MATH: 96.4%, GPQA Physics: 92.8%, MMLU: 91.8%, MGSM: 89.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and o1?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and o1 supports 200K 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 o1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 20.9), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and o1?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and o1 is developed by OpenAI.

Related comparisons