Skip to main content

Model comparison

DeepSeek-R1 vs Ling 2.6 Flash

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

DeepSeek
51.67/100
Margin
7.8pts
← winning
InclusionAI
43.87/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek-R1 #103 (Supported); Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek-R1 and Ling 2.6 Flash share 11 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to DeepSeek-R1; 7 to Ling 2.6 Flash.

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
11
DeepSeek-R1 only
0
Ling 2.6 Flash only
7
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for DeepSeek-R1 and Ling 2.6 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.

Ling 2.6 Flash has the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for DeepSeek-R1.

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 DeepSeek-R1 and Ling 2.6 Flash
CategoryDeepSeek-R1ΔLing 2.6 Flash
CodingDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapLing 2.6 Flash27.0
KnowledgeDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapLing 2.6 Flash59.0
Inst. FollowingDeepSeek-R1Not measuredMarginNo overlapLing 2.6 Flash57.0

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek-R1$0.55 input / $2.19 outputLing 2.6 FlashNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek-R1Not availableLing 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek-R1Not availableLing 2.6 Flash1.07 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek-R1128KLing 2.6 Flash262KLing 2.6 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 36.5%86%Ling 2.6 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 2.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 545Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 2.3%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashResult
AA-SciCodeSource 40.3%27.1%DeepSeek-R1 leads
SciCodeSource 27%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 25.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashResult
AA-LCRSource 54.7%25.0%DeepSeek-R1 leads
CritPtSource 1.4%0.0%DeepSeek-R1 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 20.1%14.1%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 81.3%59.3%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-HLESource 14.9%6.2%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -27.1%-65.7%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 31.0%15.4%DeepSeek-R1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 84.0%95.8%DeepSeek-R1 leads
GPQASource 59%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek-R1Ling 2.6 FlashResult
AA-IFBenchSource 39.6%57.4%Ling 2.6 Flash leads
IFBenchSource 57%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare DeepSeek-R1 and Ling 2.6 Flash on BenchLM yet?

Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.

Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?

BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.

What data is available for DeepSeek-R1 and Ling 2.6 Flash today?

DeepSeek-R1: $0.55 input / $2.19 output per 1M tokens Ling 2.6 Flash: Pricing unavailable Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek-R1
API / mo$2,055
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even583M/day
Ling 2.6 Flash
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

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.