ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Perceptron Mk1.5

Perceptron Mk1.5 comes out ahead, 55 to 50 on our weighted score, though Ling 3.1 Flash is 10% cheaper per token.

  1. inclusionAI

    Ling 3.1 Flash

    Released Sep 29, 2026New

    50/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $0.90
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Ling 3.1 Flash
  2. Our pick

    Perceptron

    Perceptron Mk1.5

    Released Sep 25, 2026New

    55/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.154 / $1.54
    • Context37K
    Full specs Remove Perceptron Mk1.5

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Perceptron Mk1.5 is our pick

Perceptron Mk1.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Ling 3.1 Flash (50). It leads on inputs & features. Ling 3.1 Flash wins on price and context window. 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 · Perceptron Mk1.5 $0.502 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLing 3.1 FlashLing 3.1 Flash 262,144 · Perceptron Mk1.5 36,864 tokens
  • Widest inputsPerceptron Mk1.5Ling 3.1 Flash: Text · Perceptron Mk1.5: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingLing 3.1 FlashPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLing 3.1 FlashPerceptron Mk1.5
Price50%6461
Inputs & features30%3580
Context window20%372
Overall100%50/10055/100

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.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Perceptron Mk1.5 specifications side by side
SpecificationLing 3.1 FlashinclusionAIPerceptron Mk1.5Perceptron
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.30$0.154 (best)
Output$0.90 (best)$1.54
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.45 (best)$0.502
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersMedian of 2 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)36,864 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID——
API providers7 (best)2
ReleasedSep 29, 2026Sep 25, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
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.

  • Ling 3.1 Flash$4.80
  • Perceptron Mk1.5$4.63
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Ling 3.1 Flash or Perceptron Mk1.5?

Perceptron Mk1.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Ling 3.1 Flash (50). It leads on inputs & features. Ling 3.1 Flash wins on price and context window. 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, Ling 3.1 Flash or Perceptron Mk1.5?

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). Perceptron Mk1.5 costs $0.154 input / $1.54 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). 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 $0.502 for Perceptron Mk1.5 (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Ling 3.1 Flash has not been scored yet and Perceptron Mk1.5 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ling 3.1 Flash and Perceptron Mk1.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Ling 3.1 Flash has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 36,864 for Perceptron Mk1.5. Maximum output per response: Ling 3.1 Flash up to 32,768, Perceptron Mk1.5 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Ling 3.1 Flash accepts text; Perceptron Mk1.5 accepts text, images, audio and video. Perceptron Mk1.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Ling 3.1 Flash publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Perceptron Mk1.5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Ling 3.1 Flash is the newest, released Sep 29, 2026. Perceptron Mk1.5 came out Sep 25, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons