AI model comparison
Step 5 Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
StepFun
Step 5 Preview
Step 5 Preview is StepFun's flagship model for agentic work, built on a sparse Mixture-of-Experts architecture (27B active / 600B total parameters).
- Input / 1M
- $1
- Output / 1M
- $2.70
- Context
- 1.05M
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
- $0.08
- Output / 1M
- $0.22
- Context
- 262K
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Ling 3.1 Flash
12.8x cheaper for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Step 5 Preview
43.7 vs 41.1 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
Step 5 Preview
1.05M vs 262K tokens
Newer release
Step 5 Preview
Released October 8, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
Coding index
Agentic index
Pricing
Step 5 Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $1 | $0.08 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $2.70 | $0.22 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | $0.10 | $0.02 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | Not available |
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
Coding task
30K in, 4K out
Long document summary
150K in, 2K out
Specs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1.05M tokens | 262K tokens |
| Max output | 64K tokens | 236K tokens |
| Input types | Image, Text, Video | Text |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | High, Medium, Low | Not available |
| Default reasoning effort | Medium | Not available |
| Release date | October 8, 2026 | October 2, 2026 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Not supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
- Step 5 Preview vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Step 5 Preview vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- Step 5 Preview vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
- Step 5 Preview vs Hy4 preview
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-6 Luna
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Step 5 Preview vs GLM 5.3
- Step 5 Preview vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731
- Step 5 Preview vs Hy3
- Step 5 Preview vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- Step 5 Preview vs Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- Step 5 Preview vs Kimi K3
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Haiku 5.5
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Step 5 Preview vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-6 Astra
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-5.6 Luna
- Step 5 Preview vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Step 5 Preview vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- Step 5 Preview vs Muse Spark 1.3
- Step 5 Preview vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-6 Sol
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-5.6 Sol
- Step 5 Preview vs Grok 4.7
- Step 5 Preview vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
- Step 5 Preview vs Grok 4.6
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Opus 4.8
- Step 5 Preview vs Claude Opus 4.7
- Step 5 Preview vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
- Step 5 Preview vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- Step 5 Preview vs Muse Spark 1.2
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-5.4
- Step 5 Preview vs Grok 4.5
- Step 5 Preview vs Qwen3.8 27B
- Step 5 Preview vs Mistral Large 4
- Step 5 Preview vs Muse Spark 1.1
- Step 5 Preview vs GLM 5.3 FlashX
- Step 5 Preview vs GPT-5.6 Luna Pro
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
- Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna
Our take
Ling 3.1 Flash is 12.8x cheaper for a typical chat. Step 5 Preview scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (43.7 vs 41.1). Step 5 Preview has the larger context window (1.05M 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 Step 5 Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash cheaper?
Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.08 per 1M input tokens and $0.22 per 1M output tokens, while Step 5 Preview costs $1 per 1M input tokens and $2.70 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Step 5 Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?
Step 5 Preview supports up to 1.05M tokens of context, compared with 262K for Ling 3.1 Flash.
Is Step 5 Preview smarter than Ling 3.1 Flash?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Step 5 Preview scores 43.7 and Ling 3.1 Flash scores 41.1, putting Step 5 Preview ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Step 5 Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Step 5 Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Step 5 Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.