Skip to main content

Model comparison

Ling 2.6 Flash vs Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

InclusionAI
43.87/100
No comparison
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated); Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Ling 2.6 Flash and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) share 15 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Ling 2.6 Flash; 1 to Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning).

Updated July 21, 2026
Shared results
15
Ling 2.6 Flash only
3
Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) only
1
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Ling 2.6 Flash and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 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 256K for Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning).

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 Ling 2.6 Flash and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
CategoryLing 2.6 FlashΔMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)
CodingLing 2.6 Flash27.0MarginNo overlapMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Not measured
KnowledgeLing 2.6 Flash59.0MarginNo overlapMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Not measured
Inst. FollowingLing 2.6 Flash57.0MarginNo overlapMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Not measured

Operational comparison

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

MetricLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLing 2.6 FlashNot availableMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)$0.15 input / $0.6 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondLing 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/sMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLing 2.6 Flash1.07 sMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLing 2.6 Flash262KMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)256KLing 2.6 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
τ²-bench resultsSource 86%41.2%Ling 2.6 Flash leads
GDPval-AASource 2.2%4.4%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
GDPval-AASource 545588Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 2.3%4.7%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
Coding
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
SciCodeSource 27%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 25.3%26.6%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA-SciCodeSource 27.1%38.0%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
AA-LCRSource 25.0%44.7%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.3%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 14.1%19.6%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
GPQASource 59%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 59.3%76.9%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA-HLESource 6.2%9.5%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -65.7%-29.9%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 15.4%22.1%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 95.8%66.8%Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource 56.8%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkLing 2.6 FlashMistral Small 4 (Reasoning)Result
IFBenchSource 57%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 57.4%48.2%Ling 2.6 Flash leads
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Ling 2.6 Flash and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) 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 Ling 2.6 Flash and Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning) today?

Ling 2.6 Flash: Pricing unavailable Mistral Small 4 (Reasoning): $0.15 input / $0.60 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.

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.