Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. GPT-4.1vsLing 3.0 Flash
Updated Jul 2026

GPT-4.1vsLing 3.0 Flash

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper than GPT-4.1 at $0.021/M vs $2/M input tokens.

GPT-4.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash compared across 16 shared prompts
SpecGPT-4.1Ling 3.0 Flash
Input price$2/M tokens$0.021/M tokens
Output price$8/M tokens$0.063/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens262K tokens
ParametersNot disclosed124B
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedApr 2025Jul 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 16 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

GPT-4.1735 words
Certainly! Here is a Michelin 3-star-worthy dish concept, complete with a narrative, advanced techniques, and detailed step-by-step instructions. Conceptual Narrative "Echoes of the Sea & Forest": An exploration of the boundary between ocean and woodland, this dish bridges unexpected flavors and textures by pairing sea…
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash2,510 words
🍽️ TERRA NUDA — A Study in Forest Petrichor A Six-Component Dish Exploring the Ephemeral Moment After Rain Falls on a Living Forest 📖 CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE Terra Nuda — Latin for "naked earth" — is inspired by the liminal moment immediately after a summer storm passes through a forest: the air thick with petrichor…
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

GPT-4.1135 words
Recipe Name: Golden Honey Butter Toast Bites Ingredients: Sliced bread (4 slices, any type) Butter (2 tablespoons) Honey (2 tablespoons) Cinnamon (1/2 teaspoon) Vanilla extract (1/2 teaspoon) Brown sugar (1 tablespoon) Salt (a pinch) Instructions: Preheat your oven to 375°F (190°C).
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash248 words
🍝 Honey Fire Twirls A sticky-sweet, spicy, savory pasta that comes together in minutes. 🧺 Ingredients (7 pantry staples) Spaghetti (or penne) — 8 oz Olive oil — 2 tablespoons Garlic, minced — 4 cloves Honey — 3 tablespoons Soy sauce — 2 tablespoons Red pepper flakes — ½ teaspoon (adjust to taste) Parmesan cheese…
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

GPT-4.1833 words
This is a high-stakes scenario requiring immediate, coordinated action balancing legal, ethical, financial, and reputational considerations. Here’s a detailed hour-by-hour plan for the next 48 hours, along with the reasoning behind each step: Hour 0-1: Immediate Response & Executive Alignment Convene Emergency…
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash2,623 words
48-Hour Action Plan: Responsible Disclosure of Serious Adverse Effect FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLE Before the hour-by-hour breakdown, the strategic and ethical framework must be established clearly: proactive, transparent disclosure is the only viable path.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

GPT-4.1875 words
This is a fascinating scenario! Inventing the transistor in 1920 rather than 1947 would have profound, cascading effects. Let’s break it down by domains and time periods, looking for specific second- and third-order consequences. Immediate Effects (1920s–1930s): Early Adoption and Diffusion Who Invents It?
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash3,452 words
The 1920 Transistor: A Counterfactual Cascade Through 1980 This is a rich counterfactual. A 27-year acceleration of the transistor doesn't just move technology forward — it restructures the causal chains of the 20th century.
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

GPT-4.11,110 words
Certainly! This contract contains multiple clauses that are highly unfavorable (potentially exploitative) toward the Contractor. Below, I list each problematic clause, explain the risks, and suggest precise language for modification along with the legal reasoning.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash2,036 words
Contract Analysis: Exploitative Clauses & Recommended Modifications Clause-by-Clause Analysis SCOPE — Unilateral Modification Without Compensation The Problem: Client can modify the scope at any time and for any reason without paying Contractor for the additional work.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

GPT-4.11,087 words
Absolutely! Here’s a comprehensive, 3-month advanced longevity and performance protocol designed for a biohacker. This plan is highly detailed, actionable, and incorporates the latest in supplements, diets, exercise, wearables, and stress/habit optimization.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash2,901 words
🧬 THE 90-DAY LONGEVITY OPTIMIZATION BLUEPRINT A Comprehensive Biohacking Protocol for Cellular Renewal, Cognitive Enhancement & Vitality Disclaimer: This protocol is for educational and informational purposes only. Many compounds listed (rapamycin, metformin, etc.) require physician supervision and prescription.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
GPT-4.1
GPT-4.1
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Ling 3.0 Flash costs 127x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GPT-4.1
Input
$2.00
Output
$8.00
Ling 3.0 Flash
Input
$0.02
95× cheaper
Output
$0.06
127× cheaper

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper on both: 95× input, 127× output.

Where to run it

4 hosts, cheapest first

GPT-4.12 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Azure AI Foundry$2.00 in·$8.00 out·1M·99.8% upOpenAI$2.00 in·$8.00 out·1M·100% up
Ling 3.0 Flash2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
NNovita$0.02 in·$0.06 out·262k·100% upDDeepInfrabf16$0.06 in·$0.18 out·131k·99.6% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 22 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

GPT-4.1 is developed by OpenAI while Ling 3.0 Flash is developed by inclusionAI. GPT-4.1 has a 1.0M token context window vs Ling 3.0 Flash's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 16 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. GPT-4.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 16 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

GPT-4.1 costs $2/M input tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.021/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash is $1.98/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-4.1 and Ling 3.0 Flash across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

GPT-4.1 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
GPT-4.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
GPT-4.1 logoHy3 logo
GPT-4.1 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GPT-4.1 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
GPT-4.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGLM 5.3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
GPT-4.1 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
GPT-4.1 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

GPT-4.1 logoGPT-4.1 Mini logo
GPT-4.1 vs GPT-4.1 MiniVersion compare
GPT-4.1 logoGPT-6 Astra Pro logo
GPT-4.1 vs GPT-6 Astra ProVersion compare
Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Sante (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoClaude 3 Haiku logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Claude 3 HaikuNew provider
GPT-4.1 logoClaude 3 Opus logo
GPT-4.1 vs Claude 3 OpusSame size
Ling 3.0 Flash logoClaude Sonnet 3.6 (2022-10-22) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Claude Sonnet 3.6 (2022-10-22)New provider
Ling 3.0 Flash logoClaude 3.7 Sonnet logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Claude 3.7 SonnetNew provider

Model pages

GPT-4.1 logo
GPT-4.159 outputs, specs and price
Ling 3.0 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash16 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed