Skip to main content
idapt
HomeAI ModelsExploreResourcesPricing
Sign inUse for Free
  • Home
  • Pricing
  • AI Models
  • Skills
  • Image models
  • Voice models
  • Video models
  • Rankings
  • Multi-Model Chat
  • Agents
  • Computers
  • Drive
  • Automations
  • AI Gateway
  • All features →
  • Blog
  • About
  • Comparisons
  • Benchmarks
  • Model Match
  • Demos
  • Help center
  • FAQ
  • Privacy
  • Support
  • Developers
  • Quickstarts
  • API reference
  • API pricing
  • CLI
  • MCP
  • Migrate
  • Downloads
  • Desktop
© idapt[email protected]TermsPrivacy PolicyLegal noticeReport content
X (Twitter)Discord

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5

At a glance

InclusionAI's fast hybrid-reasoning MoE, 560B total with 25B active.

262K ctx$0/$0 per M

Anthropic's new flagship for demanding reasoning, coding, and long-horizon agentic work, succeeding Claude Opus 5.

1M ctx$4.00/$20.00 per M
Demos
All demos

No shared demos for these models yet.

AI Output
All AI outputs

No captured outputs for these models yet.

Benchmarks
See rankings
No benchmarks available

This model hasn't been benchmarked yet.

Reasoning
CodingInsufficient data
AgenticInsufficient data
Sources:Epoch AI·OpenRouter· as of 2026-10-02
Reasoning & Knowledge
Graduate Science90.6%Factual Recall72.2%
Math
Competition Math100.0%
Agentic
Novel Reasoning92.5%
Specs
262K
Context
33K
Max output
Oct 2026
Released
1M
Context
128K
Max output
Sep 2026
Released
Capabilities
Vision
Audio
Reasoning
Vision
Audio
Reasoning
Pricing
Live pricing, shown before you run
Input$0/M
Output$0/M
Live pricing, shown before you run
Input$4.00/M tokens
Output$20.00/M tokens
Cache read$0.20/M tokens
Cache write$5.00/M tokens
Web search$0.01/search
Chat with Ling 3.1 FlashGo to model
Chat with Claude Opus 5.5Go to model
Frequently Asked Questions: Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5▼

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Claude Opus 5.5?

▼

Both Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 5.5 are capable AI models. The best choice depends on your specific use case: consider pricing, context window, speed, and which capabilities (vision, reasoning, audio) you need.

Which has a larger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Claude Opus 5.5?

▼

Claude Opus 5.5 has a larger context window: Ling 3.1 Flash supports 262K tokens vs Claude Opus 5.5 at 1M tokens.

Do both Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 5.5 support vision?

▼

Claude Opus 5.5 supports vision/image input, but Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

What are the key differences between Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 5.5?

▼

Key differences: only Claude Opus 5.5 supports vision input. Compare full specs on this page.

Which model should I choose for my use case?

▼

If cost is your priority, choose the cheaper option. If you need the highest intelligence for complex tasks, pick the higher-scoring model. For long documents or codebases, choose the larger context window. You can try both Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 5.5 for free on idapt.app to see which performs better for your specific needs.

Open in App