Model Comparison
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Longcat 2.5
Ling 3.1 Flash ranks #51 on the AI IQ leaderboard with an estimated IQ of 120, while Longcat 2.5 ranks #100 on the AI IQ leaderboard with an estimated IQ of 105. The table below puts the two models side by side across the seven capability dimensions, emotional reasoning, cost, speed, and context window.
Where They Sit on the IQ Bell Curve
Both models highlighted on the standard normal IQ distribution of every tracked model
| Ling 3.1 FlashChina (Other) | Longcat 2.5China (Other) | |
|---|---|---|
| Rank | #51 | #100 |
| IQ | 120 | 105 |
| Abstract Reasoning | 102 | 85 |
| Mathematical Reasoning | 110 | 94 |
| Academic Reasoning | 131 | 118 |
| Programmatic Reasoning | 140 | 99 |
| Computer Use | 113 | 127 |
| Reliability | 118 | 107 |
| Knowledge Work | 124 | 108 |
| Emotional Reasoning | — | — |
| Effective Cost / 1M Tokens | — | — |
| Sticker Price / 1M I/O Tokens | — | — |
| Speed | 214 tok/s | — |
| Context Window | 1M | — |
| Released | 2026-09-30 | 2026-11-02 |
| Open Weights | Yes | No |
More comparisons
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Deepseek V4 Pro
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Fable 5.2
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Glm 5.3
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT 6 Astra
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Grok 4.7
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mimo V2.6 Pro
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Minimax M3
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Muse Wonder Full
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max 0902
- Longcat 2.5 vs Deepseek V4 Pro
- Longcat 2.5 vs Fable 5.2
- Longcat 2.5 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Longcat 2.5 vs Glm 5.3
- Longcat 2.5 vs GPT 6 Astra
- All comparisons