- Rank
- #80
- Total Output Tokens
- 67,842
- Response Time (avg)
- 16.72s
- Total Cost
- $3.490
Claude Opus 4.8 (medium) vs Ling 3.1 Flash (medium)
The average score is effectively tied at 8.3 vs 8.3. Ling 3.1 Flash (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.000 vs $3.490. Claude Opus 4.8 (medium) is faster at 16.72s vs 88.74s, with pass rates of 82.6% vs 71.0%.
Compared models
- Rank
- #81
- Total Output Tokens
- 648,854
- Response Time (avg)
- 88.74s
- Total Cost
- $0.000
Recommended model
Claude Opus 4.8 (medium)
It has the best score here (8.3), while responding about 5.3x faster than Ling 3.1 Flash (medium).
Detailed comparison
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 medium | Ling 3.1 Flash Ling 3.1 Flash medium |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 8.3 | 8.3 |
| Rank | #80 | #81 |
| Reliability | 10.0 | 9.6 |
| Consistency | 9.0 | 8.8 |
| Attempts | 69/69 | 69/69 |
| Tests Correct | ||
| Attempt pass rate | 82.6% | 71.0% |
| Flaky tests | 3 | 3 |
| Total Runs | 69 | 69 |
| Cost per result | 20.527 | 0.000 |
| Total Cost | $3.490 | $0.000 |
| Input Price | $5.000 / 1M | $0.000 / 1M |
| Output Price | $25.000 / 1M | $0.000 / 1M |
| Cache Read Price | $0.500 / 1M | N/A |
| Cache Write Price | $6.250 / 1M | N/A |
| Total Input Tokens | 360,294 | 369,495 |
| Output Tokens | 43,441 | 172,852 |
| Reasoning Tokens | 24,401 | 476,002 |
| Response Time (avg) | 16.72s | 88.74s |
| Response Time (max) | 99.37s | 567.88s |
| Response Time (total) | 384.66s | 2041.10s |
| Parameters | ~5T total (~500B active) | 560B total (25B active) |
| Availability | Closed | Closed |
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Model generation showcase
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
#80 Claude Opus 4.8
medium- Cost
- $0.057
- Time
- 23.1s
- Tokens
- 2,412 tok
#81 Ling 3.1 Flash
medium- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 101.1s
- Tokens
- 11,607 tok
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Category Breakdown
| Agentic | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 6.1 | 3.1 | 66.7% | 1 | 99.37s | 221,846 | 2,676 | 13,239 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 100.10s | 233,792 | 12,506 | 12,249 |
| Anti-AI Tricks | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 3.95s | 834 | 1,179 | 478 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 4.24s | 750 | 1,152 | 3,396 |
| Coding | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 15.33s | 10,590 | 9,945 | 1,381 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 87.15s | 8,298 | 19,577 | 62,002 |
| Combined | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 9.9 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 54.29s | 101,005 | 19,531 | 4,762 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 6.6 | 9.1 | 50.0% | 0 | 306.46s | 106,402 | 26,806 | 100,471 |
| Data parsing and extraction | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 7.1 | 5.6 | 83.3% | 1 | 12.29s | 10,503 | 481 | 312 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 20.92s | 8,016 | 1,334 | 3,754 |
| Domain specific | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 3.6 | 7.2 | 22.2% | 1 | 18.11s | 972 | 7,476 | 2,987 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 2.9 | 7.2 | 11.1% | 1 | 262.25s | 837 | 100,307 | 228,869 |
| General Intelligence | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 2.46s | 708 | 237 | 0 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 5.3 | 10.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 7.28s | 546 | 152 | 1,820 |
| Instructions following | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 3.32s | 909 | 373 | 320 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 9.8 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 3.57s | 744 | 323 | 1,317 |
| Puzzle Solving | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 3.95s | 894 | 791 | 483 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 8.2 | 7.2 | 88.9% | 1 | 42.32s | 747 | 5,455 | 40,080 |
| Tool Calling | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 100.0% | 0 | 8.96s | 11,775 | 301 | 225 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 2.8 | 2.1 | 33.3% | 1 | 47.17s | 9,135 | 3,850 | 12,018 |
| Trivia | Score | Consistency | Attempt pass rate | Flaky tests | Tests Correct | Response Time (avg) | Input Tokens | Output Tokens | Reasoning Tokens |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Opus 4.8 | 3.0 | 10.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 6.14s | 258 | 451 | 214 | |
| Ling 3.1 Flash | 3.0 | 10.0 | 0.0% | 0 | 32.55s | 228 | 1,390 | 10,026 |
Quick Compare
Switch Comparison Pair
Ling 3.1 FlashmediumvsGrok 4.5highClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsGrok 4.5highClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsKimi K3maxLing 3.1 FlashmediumvsKimi K3maxClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsGemini 3.5 FlashhighGemini 3.5 FlashhighvsLing 3.1 FlashmediumClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsGPT-5.6 TerrahighLing 3.1 FlashmediumvsGPT-5.6 TerrahighClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsGLM 5.2highLing 3.1 FlashmediumvsGLM 5.2highClaude Opus 4.8mediumvsDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731highDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731highvsLing 3.1 Flashmedium