Claude Opus 5.5 vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash is 71.1× cheaper for typical traffic ; Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis intelligence index (57.6 vs 41.1).
Prices checked Oct 21, 2026
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Ling 3.1 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | inclusionAI |
| Input / 1M tokens | $4.00 | $0.075 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $20.00 | $0.225 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.20 | $0.015 |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 236K |
| Intelligence index | 57.6 | 41.1 |
| Image input | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning mode | Yes | Yes |
| Open weights | No | No |
Monthly cost for common workloads
| Workload | Claude Opus 5.5 | Ling 3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Customer chatbot 1,000 conversations a day, 8 turns each | $2,299 | $32.94 |
| Document Q&A (RAG) 500 questions a day over retrieved documents | $476 | $7.90 |
| Coding / tool-using agent 200 tasks a day, long tool-heavy contexts | $894 | $16.20 |
| Content generation 30 long articles a day | $55.80 | $0.709 |
| Classification / extraction 100,000 short items a day | $4,500 | $77.63 |
Estimates include cached-input discounts where a model offers them. Try your own numbers in the cost calculator.
Which one to choose
- Lowest cost: Ling 3.1 Flash — 71.1× cheaper on a 3:1 input/output mix.
- Longer documents: Claude Opus 5.5 reads up to 1M tokens at once.
- Capabilities: Claude Opus 5.5 — vision, tools, reasoning, JSON; Ling 3.1 Flash — tools, reasoning, JSON.