Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Ling 3.1 Flash and Grok 4.7, 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
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Grok 4.7
Live dataset updated 10/5/2026, 11:14:34 AM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Ling 3.1 Flash InclusionAI | Grok 4.7 xAI |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #73 | #29 |
| Index score | 59.9 | 71.4 |
| Evidence | Estimatedpublisher-corpus-prior over 231 held-out anchors (22%); opens from measured predecessor inclusionai/ling-3.0-flash (78%); shrunk 0.7 up toward the measured corpus | Measured4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards |
| Input / 1M | Free | $2.00 |
| Output / 1M | Free | $6.00 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 262K | 500K |
| Providers | 1 | 1 |
| Weight access | No linked weights | No linked weights |
Decision facts
- Ling 3.1 Flash is #73; Grok 4.7 is #29 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 59.9 for Ling 3.1 Flash and 71.4 for Grok 4.7. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Evidence differs: Ling 3.1 Flash is Estimated; Grok 4.7 is Measured.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $0 for Ling 3.1 Flash and $6.00 for Grok 4.7. 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 $7.00 for Grok 4.7. 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 262,144 tokens for Ling 3.1 Flash and 500,000 for Grok 4.7.
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 Muse Spark 1.3#1 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#2 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#1 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#2 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra#1 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6 Astra#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra#4 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5#1 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5#2 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#6 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#6 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#1 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#2 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#7 vs #3 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol#7 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra#7 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#6 vs #7 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro#3 vs #8 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.