Model Comparison
Ring-2.6-1T
vs. Step 3.7 Flash
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · InclusionAI, StepFun
Recommended Pick
StStep 3.7 Flash11 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Step 3.7 Flash
100.0 value score
44.4 reasoning / $0.44/1M
Lowest Price
Step 3.7 Flash
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Ring-2.6-1T
46.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Ring-2.6-1T
42.8 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Step 3.7 Flash has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Step 3.7 Flash is 1.5x cheaper on input tokens than Ring-2.6-1T.
Speed gap
Step 3.7 Flash generates about 3.1x as many tokens per second as Ring-2.6-1T.
Reasoning gap
Ring-2.6-1T leads Step 3.7 Flash by 1.8 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Ring-2.6-1T leads Step 3.7 Flash by 3.2 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Ring-2.6-1T
InclusionAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | In Ring-2.6-1T | Top Pick St Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.50/1M | $1.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.85/1M | $0.44/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | InclusionAI | StepFun |
| Release Date | May 8, 2026 | May 29, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 123.3 tok/s | 380.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1698ms | 710ms |
| Latency | 17922ms | 5965ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 53.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 46.2 | 44.4 |
| Intelligence | 31.3 | 30.9 |
| Coding | 42.8 | 39.6 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 85.7% | 80.9% |
| HLE | 21.6% | 21.4% |
| SciCode | 42.4% | 40.0% |
| LCR | 67.3% | 69.7% |
| IFBench | 44.6% | 67.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 92.4% | 98.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 28.8% | 35.6% |
Key Takeaways
Step 3.7 Flash offers the best value at $0.20/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Ring-2.6-1T has the strongest reasoning profile with a 46.2 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Ring-2.6-1T reaches a 42.8 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Ring-2.6-1T
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Step 3.7 Flash
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
