GPT-4 Paid vs INLing 3.1 Flash Paid
GPT-4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Full 2026 breakdown.
GPT-4 — full profile › · Ling 3.1 Flash — full profile ›
Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai
Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.
$60 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
$0.22 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
GPT-4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash specs
| Spec | GPT-4 | Ling 3.1 Flash | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | InclusionAI | – |
| Type | Proprietary | Proprietary | – |
| Context window | 8K tokens | 262K tokens | INLing 3.1 Flash |
| Input price | $30/M | $0.08/M | INLing 3.1 Flash |
| Output price | $60/M | $0.22/M | INLing 3.1 Flash |
| Vision / multimodal | No | No | – |
| Tool / function calling | Yes | Yes | = Tie |
| Self-hostable | No (API only) | No (API only) | – |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary | – |
Price gap & when to choose each
Ling 3.1 Flash is ~273× cheaper than GPT-4 on output tokens ($0.22 vs $60 per M tokens).
- You want frontier performance through a managed API
- You value reliability & ecosystem
- You don't want to manage infrastructure
- You want frontier performance through a managed API
- You need the longer 262K context window
- You want the lower output price
- You value reliability & ecosystem
- You don't want to manage infrastructure
Feature comparison
| Capability | GPT-4 | Ling 3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Open weights (downloadable) | ✗ | ✗ |
| Self-hostable | ✗ | ✗ |
| Runs fully offline | ✗ | ✗ |
| Vision / multimodal | ✗ | ✗ |
| Tool / function calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| 1M+ context window | ✗ | ✗ |
Benchmarks: GPT-4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).
Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.
How GPT-4 and Ling 3.1 Flash score
| Criterion | GPT-4 | Ling 3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-efficiency | 2.0 | 5.0 |
| Context window | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| Openness | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Self-hosting | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Multimodality | 3.5 | 3.5 |
Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.
What each model is
GPT-4 Paid
OpenAI's flagship model, GPT-4 is a large-scale multimodal language model capable of solving difficult problems with greater accuracy than previous models due to its broader general knowledge and advanced reasoning...
Ling 3.1 Flash Paid
Ling 3.1 Flash is a hybrid reasoning mixture-of-experts model from inclusionAI, with 25B active parameters out of 560B total.
Frequently asked questions
GPT-4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash — which is cheaper?
Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper on output ($0.22/M vs $60/M).
Which has the larger context window?
Ling 3.1 Flash offers the larger context window (262K tokens).
GPT-4 vs Ling 3.1 Flash — which should I pick in 2026?
Choose Ling 3.1 Flash for the lower output price ($0.22/M vs $60/M). It also gives you the larger 262K context window.
People also compare
Explore more open-source AI
Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.
Open the leaderboard →