AI model comparison
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
inclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Ling 3.1 Flash is a hybrid reasoning mixture-of-experts model from inclusionAI, with 25B active parameters out of 560B total.
- Input / 1M
- $0.00
- Output / 1M
- $0.00
- Context
- 262K
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 is Anthropic's most capable generally available model in the Opus family.
- Input / 1M
- $5
- Output / 1M
- $25
- Context
- 1M
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Ling 3.1 Flash
Free for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Claude Opus 4.8
41.8 vs 41.1 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
Claude Opus 4.8
1M vs 262K tokens
Newer release
Ling 3.1 Flash
Released October 2, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
Claude Opus 4.841.8Coding index
Claude Opus 4.874.3Agentic index
Claude Opus 4.841.9Pricing
Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 4.8 API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.00 | $5 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.00 | $25 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | Not available | $0.50 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | $6.25 |
| Web searchPer request | Not available | $0.01 |
What it costs in practice
Estimated cost per 1,000 requests at standard rates. Coding and long-document figures also show the cost when the input is already cached.
Chat message
2K in, 500 out
Claude Opus 4.8$22.50Coding task
30K in, 4K out
Claude Opus 4.8$250$115 cachedLong document summary
150K in, 2K out
Claude Opus 4.8$800$125 cachedSpecs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | |
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 262K tokens | 1M tokens |
| Max output | 33K tokens | 128K tokens |
| Input types | Text | File, Image, Text |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | Not available | Max, Extra high, High, Medium, Low |
| Default reasoning effort | Not available | High |
| Release date | October 2, 2026 | May 27, 2026 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Not supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Not supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Not supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Not supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
Claude Opus 4.8View full model details- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 5
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Fable 5
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.3
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Kimi K3
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.7
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.4
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.5
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 4.6
Our take
Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (41.8 vs 41.1). Claude Opus 4.8 has the larger context window (1M vs 262K tokens). The right pick depends on your workload, so the quickest way to settle it is to send the same prompt to both and compare.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is Ling 3.1 Flash or Claude Opus 4.8 cheaper?
Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.00 per 1M input tokens and $0.00 per 1M output tokens, while Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5 per 1M input tokens and $25 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Claude Opus 4.8?
Claude Opus 4.8 supports up to 1M tokens of context, compared with 262K for Ling 3.1 Flash.
Is Ling 3.1 Flash smarter than Claude Opus 4.8?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Ling 3.1 Flash scores 41.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 scores 41.8, putting Claude Opus 4.8 ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Ling 3.1 Flash and Claude Opus 4.8 at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.