Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 4.1 Opus vs Ling 2.6 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

45.88/100
Margin
2.0pts
← winning
InclusionAI
43.87/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus #142 (Supported); Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus and Ling 2.6 Flash share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus; 17 to Ling 2.6 Flash.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
1
Claude 4.1 Opus only
3
Ling 2.6 Flash only
17
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick Claude 4.1 Opus if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ling 2.6 Flash only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude 4.1 Opus has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 45.88 versus 43.87. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Claude 4.1 Opus's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 74.5 against 27.

Ling 2.6 Flash gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude 4.1 Opus and Ling 2.6 Flash
CategoryClaude 4.1 OpusΔLing 2.6 Flash
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus74.5Margin 47.5Ling 2.6 Flash27.0
KnowledgeClaude 4.1 OpusNot measuredMarginNo overlapLing 2.6 Flash59.0
Inst. FollowingClaude 4.1 OpusNot measuredMarginNo overlapLing 2.6 Flash57.0

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 4.1 Opus$15 input / $75 outputLing 2.6 FlashNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 4.1 Opus29 tok/sLing 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/sLing 2.6 Flash has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 4.1 Opus1.66 sLing 2.6 Flash1.07 sLing 2.6 Flash reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 4.1 Opus200KLing 2.6 Flash262KLing 2.6 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
JobBenchSource 21.9%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 86%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 2.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 545Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 2.3%Not comparable
CodingClaude 4.1 Opus wins
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 74.5%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 27%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 25.3%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 27.1%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
AA-LCRSource 25.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 28.2%14.1%Claude 4.1 Opus leads
GPQASource 59%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 59.3%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 6.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -65.7%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 15.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 95.8%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1207Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 4.1 OpusLing 2.6 FlashResult
IFBenchSource 57%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 57.4%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Claude 4.1 Opus or Ling 2.6 Flash?

Claude 4.1 Opus is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 45.88 to 43.87.

Which is better for coding, Claude 4.1 Opus or Ling 2.6 Flash?

Claude 4.1 Opus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 74.5 versus 27. Ling 2.6 Flash stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 21, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.