Granite 4.2 8B is $0.01 cheaper per 1M input tokens (20% lower; 1.25x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
NewLing 3.1 Flash vs Granite 4.2 8B
Pick Granite 4.2 8B for lower cost; pick Ling 3.1 Flash only if the larger context window matters more.
Page updated:
Data confirmed:
Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens
Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output
Budget verdict
Pick Granite 4.2 8B for lower cost; pick Ling 3.1 Flash only if the larger context window matters more.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Granite 4.2 8B is estimated at $0.18 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.0025 (1.3% lower).
Cost-first pickGranite 4.2 8B
Context-first pickLing 3.1 Flash
Sample savings$0.00251.3%
10x traffic gap$0.03
Ling 3.1 Flash has more context, but Granite 4.2 8B saves $0.0025 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $0.03. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Cost winner changes by workload shape: input-heavy / RAG favors Granite 4.2 8B, balanced workload favors Ling 3.1 Flash, and output-heavy chatbot favors Ling 3.1 Flash.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | Ling 3.1 Flash | Granite 4.2 8B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | Granite 4.2 8B | $0.49 | $0.42 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | Ling 3.1 Flash | $0.3 | $0.31 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | Ling 3.1 Flash | $1.2 | $1.31 |
Ling 3.1 Flash is $0.02 cheaper per 1M output tokens (10% lower; 1.11x difference).
Ling 3.1 Flash has 131.07K more context (2x larger).
Granite 4.2 8B is $0.0025 cheaper on the standard workload (1.3% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.
Quick Decision
Granite 4.2 8B has the lower input price; Ling 3.1 Flash has the lower output price; Ling 3.1 Flash offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash and $0.18 for Granite 4.2 8B.
Choose Ling 3.1 Flash when you care most about lower output-token price, and larger context window.
Choose Granite 4.2 8B when you care most about lower input-token price.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Granite 4.2 8B is estimated at $0.18 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.0025 (1.3% lower).
- Granite 4.2 8B is $0.0025 cheaper on the standard workload (1.3% lower).
- Granite 4.2 8B is $0.01 cheaper per 1M input tokens (20% lower; 1.25x difference).
- Ling 3.1 Flash is $0.02 cheaper per 1M output tokens (10% lower; 1.11x difference).
- Ling 3.1 Flash has 131.07K more context (2x larger).
| Feature | NewLing 3.1 Flash (inclusionAI) | Granite 4.2 8B (IBM) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.075 | $0.06 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.225 | $0.25 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.19 | $0.18 |
| Context Window | 262.14K | 131.07K |
| Release Date |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | Granite 4.2 8B | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Granite 4.2 8B is estimated at $0.18 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.0025 (1.3% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | Granite 4.2 8B | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | Ling 3.1 Flash | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Ling 3.1 Flash | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Tiny (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- GPT-6 Luna Pro (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- GPT-6 Luna (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- Owl Alpha offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
- Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor offers 1.05M context with $0.2 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · DeepSeek · #1
- Step 5 Preview · StepFun · #2
- GLM 5.3 Flash · Z.ai · #3
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash · Xiaomi · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsinclusionAI catalog
Review all tracked inclusionAI models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open inclusionAI modelsIBM catalog
Check other IBM models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open IBM modelsLing 3.1 Flash is a hybrid reasoning mixture-of-experts model from inclusionAI, with 25B active parameters out of 560B total.
Granite 4.2 8B is a dense reasoning model from IBM. It is suited for mathematics, code generation, multilingual dialogue, and agentic workflows that need multi-step reasoning. It supports full, low-effort,...