Beam 1.0 501B A23B vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Overall
57
vs
Overall
45

Beam 1.0 501B A23B is clearly better. It wins 36 of the 54 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. Ling 3.1 Flash spends 1.6× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
5717.2s
4K, 87% thinking7.9K, 73% thinking
451m 16s
Agents
5521.8s
4.8K, 90% thinking4.5K, 66% thinking
4155.9s
Structured Extraction
819.98s
3.4K, 91% thinking8.1K, 69% thinking
711m 11s
Coding
4819.9s
4.5K, 70% thinking11.3K, 89% thinking
241m 42s
Grounded Answers
6911.6s
2.7K, 88% thinking6.7K, 74% thinking
5258.9s
Instruction Following
7820.9s
5.6K, 90% thinking11.4K, 77% thinking
761m 55s
Business Logic
5714.0s
4.2K, 95% thinking9.7K, 56% thinking
381m 22s
Security & permissions
5120.6s
3.2K, 88% thinking5.2K, 74% thinking
5456.1s
Diagnosis & investigation
1724.3s
3.1K, 90% thinking3.2K, 72% thinking
042.1s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
274 tok/s (better)
112 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
1M (better)
256K
Cost per run
$0.83
Not measured
Cost per case
$0.0054
Not measured
Time per case
17.2s (better)
1m 16s
Quantization
FP8
—
Harness
openrouter
openrouter

The race

2 lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Beam 1.0 501B A23BLing 3.1 Flash
025507510050100150Perfect run5745

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

36 won by Beam 1.0 501B A23B18 won by Ling 3.1 Flash99 tied