Ling 3.1 FlashvsClaude Opus 5

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall Podium Score by 7.1 points (88.5 vs 81.4).Category wins: Ling 3.1 Flash 2 — 2 Claude Opus 5.Ling 3.1 Flash is the cheaper pick ($0.8/M vs $25/M per 1M output tokens). Ling 3.1 Flash is faster (175 t/s vs 60 t/s).

Open in Compare Tool →View Ling 3.1 FlashView Claude Opus 5
Ling 3.1 FlashDrag slider or hover to compareClaude Opus 5
Claude Opus 5
81.4
Coding: 70.4 · Speed: 60 t/s
Output Price: $25/M
Ling 3.1 Flash
88.5
Coding: 50.0 · Speed: 175 t/s
Output Price: $0.8/M
Quick VerdictAggregated 2026 Benchmark Analysis

Ling 3.1 Flash is rated higher overall with a Podium Score of 88.5 (vs 81.4 for Claude Opus 5). Both models show closely matched capabilities across domain benchmarks.

Coding & Engineering
Claude Opus 5 (70.4)
Inference Speed
Ling 3.1 Flash (175 t/s)
Cost Efficiency
Ling 3.1 Flash ($0.8/M)
API Price / 1M (in · out)
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.15/M · $0.8/M — Claude Opus 5 $5/M · $25/M

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash for complex reasoning and analysis, and Claude Opus 5 for long documents and large codebases.

MetricLing 3.1 FlashClaude Opus 5
Podium Score88.5 ▲81.4
Arena Elo14181492 ▲
Intelligence Index56.061.0 ▲
Coding50.070.4 ▲
Math78.0—
Reasoning85.0 ▲82.3
Agentic58.0—
Knowledge42.0 ▲37.1
Multimodal40.0—
Long-context68.099.2 ▲
Output speed175 t/s ▲60 t/s
Output price$0.8/M ▲$25/M
Context window131K1000K ▲
Scores aggregated from five independent leaderboards. See Methodology. More head-to-heads: Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Mythos · Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude 5.5 Sonnet · Ling 3.1 Flash vs Kimi K3.1 Pro · Ling 3.1 Flash vs Eleven Multilingual v3
0 / 4
Compare Now →