Claude 3 Opus vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 9.9. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 333.3x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 9.9, ranking #39 overall.
On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 333.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin also accepts a larger context window (262,144 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude 3 Opus
- you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $75.00/M output
Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
- overall performance matters — it scores 43.3 and ranks #39 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
- cost matters — it's about 333.3x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
11 reported for Claude 3 Opus · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Claude 3 Opus and Ling 3.0 Flash Findon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude 3 Opus ($15.00/1M tokens) is 250.0x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude 3 Opus ($75.00/1M tokens) is 416.7x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude 3 Opus is more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to Claude 3 Opus's 200,000 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Claude 3 Opus is limited to 200,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude 3 Opus supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.
Claude 3 Opus can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Claude 3 Opus
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude 3 Opus was released on 2024-02-29, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 31 months newer than Claude 3 Opus.
Feb 29, 2024
2.5 years ago
Sep 3, 2026
6 days ago
2.5yr newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Claude 3 Opus is available from Anthropic, Bedrock, Google. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.
Claude 3 Opus
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude 3 Opus and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude 3 Opus vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.