The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 26.1.

LG AI Research · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 26.1, ranking #39 overall.

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

Choose EXAONE 4.5 33B

  • you are already invested in the LG AI Research ecosystem

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
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

EXAONE 4.5 33B
LG AI Research
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
26.1
#150
43.3
#39
Reasoning
26.7
#143
44.7
#32
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
—
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
EXAONE 4.5 33B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Tool use
10.6#121
20.5#56
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

15 reported for EXAONE 4.5 33B · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

EXAONE 4.5 33B 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

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

91.0B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 91.0B more parameters than EXAONE 4.5 33B, making it 275.8% larger.

LG AI Research
EXAONE 4.5 33B
33.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
33.0B
EXAONE 4.5 33B
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Ling 3.0 Flash Fin specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Ling 3.0 Flash Fin specifies output context (262,144 tokens).

LG AI Research
EXAONE 4.5 33B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

EXAONE 4.5 33B supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

EXAONE 4.5 33B can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

EXAONE 4.5 33B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

EXAONE 4.5 33B was released on 2026-04-09, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 5 months newer than EXAONE 4.5 33B.

EXAONE 4.5 33B

Apr 9, 2026

5 months ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

5 days ago

4mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

EXAONE 4.5 33B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-12-01, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm EXAONE 4.5 33B's training data extends to 2024-12-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date.

EXAONE 4.5 33B

Dec 2024

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

—

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against EXAONE 4.5 33B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

EXAONE 4.5 33B
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about EXAONE 4.5 33B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, EXAONE 4.5 33B or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 26.1. EXAONE 4.5 33B is made by LG AI Research and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does EXAONE 4.5 33B compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

EXAONE 4.5 33B scores AIME 2025: 92.9%, AIME 2026: 92.6%, IFEval: 89.6%, AI2D: 89.0%, MathVista-Mini: 85.0%. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin scores SpreadSheetBench-v1: 86.5%, Finance Agent v1.1: 69.2%, Finance Agent v2: 59.8%, Tau3 Banking: 41.0%, APEX-Agents: 29.2%.

What are the context window sizes for EXAONE 4.5 33B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

EXAONE 4.5 33B supports an unknown number of tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between EXAONE 4.5 33B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (26.1 vs 43.3), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes EXAONE 4.5 33B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

EXAONE 4.5 33B is developed by LG AI Research and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons