Gemini 3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.1-flash
Wins 3 of 6 areas
Coding · Reasoning · Following instructions
Wins 2 of 6 areas
Agents · Long documents
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins more areas, narrowly.Ling-3.1-flash is cheaper and better at agents.
Scores updated · 13 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 2 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Gemini 3.1 Pro1 of 1 test
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02Ling-3.1-flash2 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Ling-3.1-flash1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Coding, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Ling-3.1-flash costs 91% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Gemini 3.1 Pro pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+25.8points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+7.6points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+4.6points ahead
Where Ling-3.1-flash pulls ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+41.4points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+29.3points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+13points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 13 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
AgentsLing-3.1-flash
- GDPValLing-3.1-flash by 41.414.756.1+41.4
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Ling-3.1-flash by 29.3433.3+29.3
ReasoningGemini 3.1 Pro
- Humanity's Last ExamGemini 3.1 Pro by 7.64739.4+7.6
- CritPttie17.718tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGemini 3.1 Pro by 25.854.929.1+25.8
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLing-3.1-flash by 1349.162.1+13
Following instructionsGemini 3.1 Pro
- Multi-ChallengeGemini 3.1 Pro by 1.671.469.8+1.6
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- CyberGymLing-3.1-flash by 49.138.887.9+49.1
- AA-OmniscienceGemini 3.1 Pro by 29.731.92.2+29.7
- Finance Agent v2Ling-3.1-flash by 14.94357.9+14.9
- AA IntelligenceLing-3.1-flash by 11.429.741.1+11.4
Questions people ask
Which is better, Gemini 3.1 Pro or Ling-3.1-flash?
Gemini 3.1 Pro wins three of the six areas where both have results: coding, reasoning and following instructions. Ling-3.1-flash wins agents and long documents, and costs 91% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Gemini 3.1 Pro. It wins the one coding test both models report.
Which is cheaper?
Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $12.00 per million output tokens; Ling-3.1-flash costs $0.30 and $0.90. That makes Ling-3.1-flash about 91% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 13 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 9 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.