The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs o1-mini

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 10.0.

InclusionAI · OpenAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 10.0, 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-mini

  • you want predictable pricing at $3.00/M input and $12.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
o1-mini
OpenAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
10.0
#282
Reasoning
47.5
#26
10.3
#276
Coding
38.8
#18
14.3
#148
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$3.00 / M
Output price
— / M
$12.00 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 6 for o1-mini

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and o1-minidon'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-mini specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only o1-mini specifies output context (65,536 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
OpenAI
o1-mini
Input128,000 tokens
Output65,536 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 o1-mini was released on 2024-09-12.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 25 months newer than o1-mini.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

2.0yr newer
o1-mini

Sep 12, 2024

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

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
o1-mini
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs o1-mini.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or o1-mini?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 10.0. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and o1-mini 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-mini in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. o1-mini scores HumanEval: 92.4%, MATH-500: 90.0%, MMLU: 85.2%, SuperGLUE: 75.0%, GPQA: 60.0%.

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

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and o1-mini 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 o1-mini?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 10.0), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and o1-mini?

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

Related comparisons