Model comparison
GPT-4.1 mini vs Ling 2.6 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 mini #152 (Estimated); Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 mini and Ling 2.6 Flash share 16 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 6 results are unique to GPT-4.1 mini; 2 to Ling 2.6 Flash.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 16
- GPT-4.1 mini only
- 6
- Ling 2.6 Flash only
- 2
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick GPT-4.1 mini if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ling 2.6 Flash only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-4.1 mini has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 44.19 versus 43.87. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
GPT-4.1 mini's sharpest advantage is in instruction following, where it averages 88.5 against 57. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 64.2% to 59%. Ling 2.6 Flash does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-4.1 mini gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Ling 2.6 Flash.
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 | GPT-4.1 mini | Δ | Ling 2.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inst. Following | GPT-4.1 mini88.5 | Margin← 31.5 | Ling 2.6 Flash57.0 |
| Knowledge | GPT-4.1 mini64.2 | Margin← 5.2 | Ling 2.6 Flash59.0 |
| Coding | GPT-4.1 mini23.6 | Margin→ 3.4 | Ling 2.6 Flash27.0 |
| Math | GPT-4.1 mini4.5 | MarginNo overlap | Ling 2.6 FlashNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 64.2%B 59%Winner: GPT-4.1 miniΔ 5.2GPQA: GPT-4.1 mini scored 64.2%; Ling 2.6 Flash scored 59%. GPT-4.1 mini wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 mini | Ling 2.6 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output | Ling 2.6 FlashNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s | Ling 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/s | Ling 2.6 Flash has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s | Ling 2.6 Flash1.07 s | GPT-4.1 mini reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4.1 mini1M | Ling 2.6 Flash262K | GPT-4.1 mini lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
CodingLing 2.6 Flash wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 mini wins8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Ling 2.6 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 87.5% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 64.2% | 59% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.8% | 14.1% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 66.4% | 59.3% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.6% | 6.2% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -50.1% | -65.7% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 17.5% | 15.4% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 82.0% | 95.8% | GPT-4.1 mini leads |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Ling 2.6 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 4.483% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, GPT-4.1 mini or Ling 2.6 Flash?
GPT-4.1 mini is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 44.19 to 43.87. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 64.2% and 59%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-4.1 mini or Ling 2.6 Flash?
GPT-4.1 mini has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 64.2 versus 59. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, GPT-4.1 mini or Ling 2.6 Flash?
Ling 2.6 Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 27 versus 23.6. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, GPT-4.1 mini or Ling 2.6 Flash?
GPT-4.1 mini has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 88.5 versus 57. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.