Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (DeepSeek) and Ling 3.1 Flash (InclusionAI) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 4 October 2026

As of 4 October 2026, Ling 3.1 Flash holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#16 vs #25); Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper per output token (Free/1M vs $4.20/1M); DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens); and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 if…

  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • you want to self-host: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 ships open weights while Ling 3.1 Flash is no linked weights.
  • you want provider choice — 20 listed API providers against 1.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 41.0% against 39.4%.

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #16 against #25 (78.1 vs 75.4 points).
  • API cost matters — Free/1M output tokens against $4.20/1M.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost Free/1M against $0.55/1M.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 41.1 against 36.0.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Ling 3.1 Flash was listed 2 October 2026, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 12 August 2026.

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Ling 3.1 Flash: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and Ling 3.1 Flash
FieldDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeekLing 3.1 FlashInclusionAI
ModelCap Index position#25#16
Index score75.478.1
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.55Free
Output price / 1M tokens$4.20Free
Context window1M tokens262K tokens
Declared route output cap944K33K
API providers listed201
Weight accessOpen weightsNo linked weights
Input modalitiesTextText
First listed12 August 20262 October 2026
PublisherDeepSeekInclusionAI

Evidence: 4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards · 1 public benchmark observation across 1 board. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Public benchmark boards where DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 or Ling 3.1 Flash has a published result
BoardDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813Ling 3.1 FlashLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)14641458–1471High—Only one result
Arena codingArena (LMArena)15051494–1517High—Only one result
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation61.3%Max—Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis36.0Max41.1ReasoningLing 3.1 Flash
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis78.7%Max—Only one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis41.0%Max39.4%ReasoningDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Ling 3.1 Flash: common questions

Is DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 better than Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 4 October 2026: #16 against #25. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 cheaper than Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper on output tokens: Free/1M against $4.20/1M. Input tokens are $0.55/1M for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and Free/1M for Ling 3.1 Flash. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $3.20 for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 versus $0 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Ling 3.1 Flash costs 100.0% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 262K. OpenRouter catalogue or provider-endpoint declaration. Limits can vary by provider and prompt length; a model-wide maximum has not been independently verified.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

The two models do not share a coding benchmark board on ModelCap yet, so no head-to-head coding score is published; the ModelCap Index position is the closest overall signal.

Are DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and Ling 3.1 Flash open-weight models?

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: Open weights. Ling 3.1 Flash: No linked weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence. A missing weight link does not identify every API or chat product that offers a model.

Where can I run DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

ModelCap currently lists 20 API providers for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 and 1 for Ling 3.1 Flash, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 vs Ling 3.1 Flash comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 4 October 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further