The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Command R+ vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -0.5.

Cohere · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -0.5, ranking #14 overall.

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

Choose Command R+

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

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.1 and ranks #14 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Command R+
Cohere
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-0.5
#342
51.1
#14
Reasoning
-0.8
#338
47.7
#25
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.25 / M
— / M
Output price
$1.00 / M
— / M
Context window
128,000
—

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Command R+ · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Command R+ 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

456.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 456.0B more parameters than Command R+, making it 438.5% larger.

Cohere
Command R+
104.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
104.0B
Command R+
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Command R+ specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Command R+ specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Cohere
Command R+
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Oct 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Command R+ was released on 2024-08-30, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 25 months newer than Command R+.

Command R+

Aug 30, 2024

2.1 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

2.1yr 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 Command R+ and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Command R+
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Command R+ vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Command R+ or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -0.5. Command R+ is made by Cohere 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 Command R+ compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

Command R+ scores HellaSwag: 88.6%, Winogrande: 85.4%, MMLU: 75.7%, ARC-C: 71.0%, GSM8k: 70.7%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the context window sizes for Command R+ and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Command R+ supports 128K tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Command R+ and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-0.5 vs 51.1), licensing (CC BY-NC vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Command R+ and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Command R+ is developed by Cohere and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons