Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.5

Ling 3.1 Flash (InclusionAI) and GPT-5.5 (OpenAI) 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, GPT-5.5 holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#13 vs #16); Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper per output token (Free/1M vs $30.00/1M); and GPT-5.5 offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash if…

  • API cost matters — Free/1M output tokens against $30.00/1M.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost Free/1M against $5.00/1M.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 41.1 against 38.4.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Ling 3.1 Flash was listed 2 October 2026, GPT-5.5 24 April 2026.

Choose GPT-5.5 if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #13 against #16 (78.9 vs 78.1 points).
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • you want provider choice — 3 listed API providers against 1.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 45.8% against 39.4%.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.5: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.5
FieldLing 3.1 FlashInclusionAIGPT-5.5OpenAI
ModelCap Index position#16#13
Index score78.178.9
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokensFree$5.00
Output price / 1M tokensFree$30.00
Context window262K tokens1M tokens
Declared route output cap33K128K
API providers listed13
Weight accessNo linked weightsNo linked weights
Input modalitiesTextFile, Image, Text
First listed2 October 202624 April 2026
PublisherInclusionAIOpenAI

Evidence: 1 public benchmark observation across 1 board · 7 public benchmark observations across 7 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.5

Public benchmark boards where Ling 3.1 Flash or GPT-5.5 has a published result
BoardLing 3.1 FlashGPT-5.5Leads
Arena textArena (LMArena)—14811478–1485HighOnly one result
Arena codingArena (LMArena)—15191513–1524HighOnly one result
LMArena AgentLMArena—4.2%3.1%–5.2%X-HighOnly one result
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation—85.0%X-HighOnly one result
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize Foundation—0.4%HighOnly one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis41.1Reasoning38.4X-HighLing 3.1 Flash
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis—84.3%X-HighOnly one result
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis—93.9%X-HighOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis39.4%Reasoning45.8%X-HighGPT-5.5
Terminal-Bench 2.1 Terminus 2Terminal-Bench—78.0X-HighOnly one result
WildClawBench OpenClawWildClawBench—58.2Only one result

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.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.5: common questions

Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than GPT-5.5?

GPT-5.5 ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 4 October 2026: #13 against #16. 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 Ling 3.1 Flash cheaper than GPT-5.5?

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper on output tokens: Free/1M against $30.00/1M. Input tokens are Free/1M for Ling 3.1 Flash and $5.00/1M for GPT-5.5. 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 $0 for Ling 3.1 Flash versus $25.00 for GPT-5.5. 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, Ling 3.1 Flash or GPT-5.5?

GPT-5.5 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, Ling 3.1 Flash or GPT-5.5?

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 Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.5 open-weight models?

Ling 3.1 Flash: No linked weights. GPT-5.5: 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 Ling 3.1 Flash and GPT-5.5?

ModelCap currently lists 1 API provider for Ling 3.1 Flash and 3 for GPT-5.5, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.5 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