Grok Code Fast 1 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

xAI · US  |  InclusionAI (Ant Group) · China · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Grok Code Fast 1 for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 or low-latency code generation and terminal tasks. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for hybrid-reasoning moe — 560b total parameters, ~25b active per token, aimed at agents, tool use, and long-document work or artificial analysis intelligence index score of 41 — above average for its price tier. On a tight budget at scale, Grok Code Fast 1 is the value pick.

Grok Code Fast 1 (xAI, US) and Ling 3.1 Flash (InclusionAI (Ant Group), China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Grok Code Fast 1 is xAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Ling 3.1 Flash is inclusionAI's (Ant Group) September 30, 2026 hybrid-reasoning MoE model — 560B parameters aimed at agents and long documents, launched as a free trial with weights still unreleased. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecGrok Code Fast 1Ling 3.1 Flash
ProviderxAI (US) InclusionAI (Ant Group) (China)
ReleasedAugust 28, 2025 September 30, 2026
Context window256K (~384 pages) 262K tokens (~393 pages)
Price (in/out)$0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens $0.3/$0.9 per 1M tokens
Open weight?No — API only No — API only
Modalitiestext, code text, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

Fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50

Grok Code Fast 1

At $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts Ling 3.1 Flash ($0.3/$0.9 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.

Low-latency code generation and terminal tasks

Grok Code Fast 1

XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality — and it runs cheaper at $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens.

High-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality

Grok Code Fast 1

Grok Code Fast 1 lists high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality among its strengths; Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Hybrid-reasoning MoE — 560B total parameters, ~25B active per token, aimed at agents, tool use, and long-document work

Ling 3.1 Flash

InclusionAI's (Ant Group) September 30, 2026 hybrid-reasoning MoE model — 560B parameters aimed at agents and long documents, launched as a free trial with weights still unreleased — and it is the newer of the two.

Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 41 — above average for its price tier

Ling 3.1 Flash

Grok Code Fast 1 is comparatively weak here — xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score

First-party pricing of $0.30/$0.90 per million tokens, with an 80% cache-read discount ($0.06/MTok)

Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash lists first-party pricing of $0.30/$0.90 per million tokens, with an 80% cache-read discount ($0.06/MTok) among its strengths; Grok Code Fast 1 does not.

Lowest cost at scale

Grok Code Fast 1

At $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.

Which should you pick?

A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume

→ Grok Code Fast 1

At $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens it undercuts Ling 3.1 Flash, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

Someone analysing very long documents or codebases

→ Ling 3.1 Flash

Larger 262K tokens window fits more in one prompt.

Anyone whose priority is fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50

→ Grok Code Fast 1

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is hybrid-reasoning moe — 560b total parameters, ~25b active per token, aimed at agents, tool use, and long-document work

→ Ling 3.1 Flash

That is its strongest area.

An enterprise with regional data-residency rules

→ Grok Code Fast 1 or Ling 3.1 Flash

Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.

Grok Code Fast 1: where it fits

XAI's speed-tier coding model at $0.20/$1.50 with a 256K window — cheap, fast agentic code over frontier quality. Released August 28, 2025 by xAI, it is built for fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50, low-latency code generation and terminal tasks, high-volume coding pipelines where speed beats peak quality, and a 256K window sized for real codebases.

Its trade-offs are real: text and code only — no image, audio or video input, xAI did not publish a SWE-Bench Verified score, a speed-tier coding model, not a frontier reasoner, and narrow focus — built for code, not general knowledge work. At $0.2 in / $1.5 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

Ling 3.1 Flash: where it fits

InclusionAI's (Ant Group) September 30, 2026 hybrid-reasoning MoE model — 560B parameters aimed at agents and long documents, launched as a free trial with weights still unreleased. Released September 30, 2026 by InclusionAI (Ant Group), it is built for hybrid-reasoning MoE — 560B total parameters, ~25B active per token, aimed at agents, tool use, and long-document work, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 41 — above average for its price tier, first-party pricing of $0.30/$0.90 per million tokens, with an 80% cache-read discount ($0.06/MTok), and predecessor Ling 3.0 Flash shipped MIT-licensed open weights, suggesting a similar path once 3.1 clears review.

Its trade-offs: shipped as an announcement plus a two-week free trial rather than a full release — no weights, no model card, and limited independent verification at launch, context window currently served at 262K tokens even though InclusionAI's stated target is 1M — the larger window isn't live yet, not yet open-weight despite InclusionAI saying it plans to open-source the model 'soon', and announced via WeChat rather than a formal English-language technical report, so some specs are vendor-reported only. At $0.3 in / $0.9 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.

The bottom line for this matchup

This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Grok Code Fast 1 (US) and Ling 3.1 Flash (China) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Grok Code Fast 1 is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.

Want both Grok Code Fast 1 and Ling 3.1 Flash without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.

See pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Grok Code Fast 1 or Ling 3.1 Flash better for coding?

Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Grok Code Fast 1 leans toward fast, cheap agentic coding at $0.20/$1.50 while Ling 3.1 Flash leans toward hybrid-reasoning moe — 560b total parameters, ~25b active per token, aimed at agents, tool use, and long-document work, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Grok Code Fast 1 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Grok Code Fast 1 is cheaper — $0.2/$1.5 per 1M tokens vs $0.3/$0.9 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.5× apart on input.

Which has the bigger context window?

Effectively neither — 256K vs 262K tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.

Can I use both Grok Code Fast 1 and Ling 3.1 Flash together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Grok Code Fast 1, Ling 3.1 Flash and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.

Which is newer, Grok Code Fast 1 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash — released September 30, 2026, about 13 months after Grok Code Fast 1.

Related comparisons

Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.