GLM 5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 16.5× cheaper than GLM 5.1 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. GLM 5.1 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (26.1 vs 24.6). Ling 3.0 Flash VL has the larger context window (262K vs 205K).
| GLM 5.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $0.97 | $0.06 |
| Output price / 1M | $3.04 | $0.18 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $1.48 | $0.09 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.18 | $0.012 |
| Context window | 205K | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Intelligence index | 26.1 | 24.6 |
| Coding index | 55.8 | 57 |
| Providers | — | — |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | — | — |
| Vision input | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2026-09-10 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, GLM 5.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 16.5× cheaper than GLM 5.1 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
GLM 5.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL: which has a bigger context window?
GLM 5.1: 204,800 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash VL: 262,144 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: GLM 5.1 ≈ $3,450, Ling 3.0 Flash VL ≈ $210.00.
More comparisons
GLM 5.1 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeGLM 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeGLM 5.1 vs Command A+GLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 Luna ProGLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 LunaGLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 Sol ProGLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 SolGLM 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5GLM 5.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedGLM 5.1 vs MiMo-V2.6-FlashGLM 5.1 vs Grok 4.7GLM 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashGLM 5.1 vs GLM 5.3 FlashXGLM 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashGLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 AstraGLM 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Command A+Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 Luna ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 LunaLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 Sol ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 SolLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Claude Opus 5.5