Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and Ling 3.1 Flash, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Live dataset updated 10/12/2026, 3:59:57 PM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite | Ling 3.1 Flash InclusionAI |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #32 | #34 |
| Index score | 72.6 | 71.6 |
| Evidence | Measured3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards | Estimated1 reported rows against measured corpus ladders (69%); global-corpus-prior over 211 held-out anchors (31%); shrunk 7.8 toward the measured corpus |
| Input / 1M | $0.30 | Free |
| Output / 1M | $2.50 | Free |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Providers | 2 | 1 |
| Weight access | No linked weights | No linked weights |
Decision facts
- Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is #32; Ling 3.1 Flash is #34 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 72.6 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 71.6 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Evidence differs: Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is Measured; Ling 3.1 Flash is Estimated.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $2.50 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and $0 for Ling 3.1 Flash. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $1.85 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite 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.
- Published context is 1,048,576 tokens for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 262,144 for Ling 3.1 Flash.
- ModelCap currently lists 2 providers for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite and 1 for Ling 3.1 Flash.
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5#2 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#1 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#2 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#1 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#2 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#1 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#4 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview#1 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview#2 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#7 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Muse Spark 1.3#7 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GPT-6.1 Sol#7 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Kimi K3#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Kimi K3#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Kimi K3#4 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Kimi K3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#8 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Kimi K3#7 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra#1 vs #12 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #12 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #12 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.