ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash

LongCat-2.5-Preview comes out ahead, 60 to 54 and 50 on our weighted score, though Ling 3.1 Flash is 14% cheaper per token.

  1. Reflection AI

    Beam 1.0 501B A23B

    Released Oct 5, 2026New

    54/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $1.00
    • Context1.05M
  2. Our pick

    Meituan (LongCat)

    LongCat-2.5-Preview

    Released Sep 25, 2026New

    60/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $1.20
    • Context1M
  3. inclusionAI

    Ling 3.1 Flash

    Released Sep 29, 2026New

    50/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

LongCat-2.5-Preview is our pick

LongCat-2.5-Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B (54) and Ling 3.1 Flash (50). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceLing 3.1 FlashLing 3.1 Flash $0.45 · Beam 1.0 501B A23B $0.475 · LongCat-2.5-Preview $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextBeam 1.0 501B A23BBeam 1.0 501B A23B 1,048,576 · LongCat-2.5-Preview 1,000,000 · Ling 3.1 Flash 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsLongCat-2.5-PreviewBeam 1.0 501B A23B: Text · LongCat-2.5-Preview: Text, Images · Ling 3.1 Flash: Text
  • Self-hostingBeam 1.0 501B A23B and Ling 3.1 FlashPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightBeam 1.0 501B A23BLongCat-2.5-PreviewLing 3.1 Flash
Price50%626064
Inputs & features30%356035
Context window20%616037
Overall100%54/10060/10050/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationBeam 1.0 501B A23BReflection AILongCat-2.5-PreviewMeituan (LongCat)Ling 3.1 FlashinclusionAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30$0.30$0.30
Output$1.00$1.20$0.90 (best)
Cached input—$0.006—
Blended (3:1)$0.475$0.525$0.45 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 7 providersOfficial LongCat APIMedian of 5 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0ProprietaryOpen
API model ID—LongCat-2.5-Preview—
API providers12 (best)47
ReleasedOct 5, 2026Sep 25, 2026Sep 29, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJun 30, 2026——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Beam 1.0 501B A23B$5.00
  • LongCat-2.5-Preview$5.40
  • Ling 3.1 Flash$4.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Beam 1.0 501B A23B, LongCat-2.5-Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?

LongCat-2.5-Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B (54) and Ling 3.1 Flash (50). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Beam 1.0 501B A23B, LongCat-2.5-Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs $0.30 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers); LongCat-2.5-Preview costs $0.30 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official LongCat API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.45 per million tokens for Ling 3.1 Flash versus $0.475 for Beam 1.0 501B A23B (1.1× as much) and $0.525 for LongCat-2.5-Preview (1.2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Beam 1.0 501B A23B has not been scored yet, LongCat-2.5-Preview has not been scored yet and Ling 3.1 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Beam 1.0 501B A23B, LongCat-2.5-Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for LongCat-2.5-Preview and 262,144 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Maximum output per response: Beam 1.0 501B A23B up to 131,072, LongCat-2.5-Preview up to 131,072, Ling 3.1 Flash up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B accepts text; LongCat-2.5-Preview accepts text and images; Ling 3.1 Flash accepts text. LongCat-2.5-Preview handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B and Ling 3.1 Flash publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; LongCat-2.5-Preview is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B is the newest, released Oct 5, 2026. Ling 3.1 Flash came out Sep 29, 2026; LongCat-2.5-Preview came out Sep 25, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Beam 1.0 501B A23B Jun 30, 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.