AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

REBeam 1.0 501B A23B Open vs INLing 3.1 Flash Paid

Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Ling 3.1 Flash compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.

REBeam 1.0 501B A23BOpenReflection
$0.25 /M input
$1 /M outputNo per-token fees if you self-host
TypeOpen-weight
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalNo
Self-hostYes
INLing 3.1 FlashPaidInclusionAI
$0.08 /M input
$0.22 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window262K tokens
MultimodalNo
Self-hostNo
Choose Beam 1.0 501B A23B if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Ling 3.1 Flash if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Ling 3.1 Flash specs

SpecBeam 1.0 501B A23BLing 3.1 FlashWinner
MakerReflectionInclusionAI–
TypeOpen-weightProprietaryREBeam 1.0 501B A23B
Context window1M tokens262K tokensREBeam 1.0 501B A23B
Input price$0.25/M · free self-host$0.08/MINLing 3.1 Flash
Output price$1/M · free self-host$0.22/MINLing 3.1 Flash
Vision / multimodalNoNo–
Tool / function callingYesYes= Tie
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)REBeam 1.0 501B A23B
LicenseOpen weightsProprietaryREBeam 1.0 501B A23B

Price gap & when to choose each

4.5×cheaper per output token

Ling 3.1 Flash is ~4.5× cheaper than Beam 1.0 501B A23B on output tokens ($0.22 vs $1 per M tokens).

REChoose Beam 1.0 501B A23B if…
  • You want to self-host or run on your cloud
  • You need the longer 1M context window
  • You prioritize data privacy & control
  • You are building open or reproducible AI
INChoose Ling 3.1 Flash if…
  • You want frontier performance through a managed API
  • You want the lower output price
  • You value reliability & ecosystem
  • You don't want to manage infrastructure

Feature comparison

CapabilityBeam 1.0 501B A23BLing 3.1 Flash
Open weights (downloadable)✓✗
Self-hostable✓✗
Runs fully offline✓✗
Vision / multimodal✗✗
Tool / function calling✓✓
1M+ context window✓✗

Benchmarks: Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).

Beam 1.0 501B A23B
Ling 3.1 Flash
Intelligence index
30.3
41.1
Humanity's Last Exam
34.7%
39.4%
Long Context Reasoning
78%
83%
SciCode
48.5%
54.1%
Speed
391.1 tok/s
214 tok/s
Latency
0.5s
1.25s
Intelligence per $
50.5
91.3

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Beam 1.0 501B A23B and Ling 3.1 Flash score

🏆 Best value & openness: Beam 1.0 501B A23B (4.6 vs 3.0 / 5)
CriterionBeam 1.0 501B A23BLing 3.1 Flash
Cost-efficiency4.55.0
Context window5.04.0
Openness5.01.5
Self-hosting5.01.0
Multimodality3.53.5

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

Beam 1.0 501B A23B Open

Reflection · Open-weight

Beam 1.0 is Reflection's open-weight reasoning model for coding and long-horizon agentic workflows. It uses a sparse mixture-of-experts architecture with 501B total and 23B active parameters per token, and a...

Ling 3.1 Flash Paid

InclusionAI · Proprietary

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

Is Beam 1.0 501B A23B as good as Ling 3.1 Flash?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but Ling 3.1 Flash may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.

Can I run Beam 1.0 501B A23B locally?

Yes. Beam 1.0 501B A23B has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. Ling 3.1 Flash is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Ling 3.1 Flash — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Beam 1.0 501B A23B if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Ling 3.1 Flash if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

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 →