The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Codestral-22B vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 50.9 to 0.0.

Mistral AI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.9 to 0.0, ranking #14 overall.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Codestral-22B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.9 and ranks #14 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Codestral-22B
Mistral AI
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
0.0
#339
50.9
#14
Reasoning
-0.1
#331
47.4
#26
Coding
2.4
#237
39.3
#16
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
—

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Codestral-22B · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Codestral-22B and Ling 3.1 Flashdon'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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

537.8B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 537.8B more parameters than Codestral-22B, making it 2422.5% larger.

Mistral AI
Codestral-22B
22.2Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
22.2B
Codestral-22B
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Codestral-22B was released on 2024-05-29, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 28 months newer than Codestral-22B.

Codestral-22B

May 29, 2024

2.4 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

2.3yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Codestral-22B and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Codestral-22B
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Codestral-22B vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Codestral-22B or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 50.9 to 0.0. Codestral-22B is made by Mistral AI and Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Codestral-22B compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

Codestral-22B scores HumanEvalFIM-Average: 91.6%, HumanEval: 81.1%, MBPP: 78.2%, Spider: 63.5%, HumanEval-Average: 61.5%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the main differences between Codestral-22B and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (0.0 vs 50.9), licensing (MNPL-0.1 vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Codestral-22B and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Codestral-22B is developed by Mistral AI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons