LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash comes out ahead, 65 to 52 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Meituan (LongCat)LongCat-2.5-Preview
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.75 / $2.95
- Context1M
- Our pick
inclusionAILing 3.1 Flash
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.075 / $0.22
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Ling 3.1 Flash is our pick
Ling 3.1 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against LongCat-2.5-Preview (52). It leads on price. LongCat-2.5-Preview wins on inputs & features 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 $0.111 · LongCat-2.5-Preview $1.30 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLongCat-2.5-PreviewLongCat-2.5-Preview 1,000,000 · Ling 3.1 Flash 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsLongCat-2.5-PreviewLongCat-2.5-Preview: Text, Images · Ling 3.1 Flash: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | LongCat-2.5-Preview | Ling 3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 95 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 60 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 52/100 | 65/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | LongCat-2.5-PreviewMeituan (LongCat) | Ling 3.1 FlashinclusionAI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.75 | $0.075 (best) |
| Output | $2.95 | $0.22 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.30 | $0.111 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 2 | 3 (best) |
| Released | Sep 25, 2026 | Sep 29, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- LongCat-2.5-Preview$13.40
- Ling 3.1 Flash$1.19
Which should you choose?
Which is better: LongCat-2.5-Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?
Ling 3.1 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against LongCat-2.5-Preview (52). It leads on price. LongCat-2.5-Preview wins on inputs & features 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, LongCat-2.5-Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?
Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). LongCat-2.5-Preview costs $0.75 input / $2.95 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.111 per million tokens for Ling 3.1 Flash versus $1.30 for LongCat-2.5-Preview (12× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models 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 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. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
LongCat-2.5-Preview has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Ling 3.1 Flash. Maximum output per response: 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?
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?
No. LongCat-2.5-Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Ling 3.1 Flash is the newest, released Sep 29, 2026. LongCat-2.5-Preview 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Step 5 PreviewThree-way comparison
- LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Step 5 PreviewStepFun
- LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Hy4 previewTencent
- LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Sakana NamazuSakana AI
- LongCat-2.5-Preview vs Motif 3Motif Technologies
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Laguna S 2.1Poolside
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNVIDIA
