Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Gemini 3.5 Flash and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched at 42.6 and 43.0 on the LLM Stats Score. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 37.5x cheaper per token.
Google · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Gemini 3.5 Flash and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 42.6 and 43.0.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 37.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Gemini 3.5 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 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 Gemini 3.5 Flash
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 37.5x cheaper per token
- 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
16 reported for Gemini 3.5 Flash · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Gemini 3.5 Flash outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is better at 1 benchmark (Finance Agent v2).
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Gemini 3.5 Flash ($1.50/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).
For output processing, Gemini 3.5 Flash ($9.00/1M tokens) is 50.0x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Gemini 3.5 Flash 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
Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's 262,144 tokens. Gemini 3.5 Flash can generate longer responses up to 1,000,000 tokens, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is limited to 262,144 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Gemini 3.5 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.
Gemini 3.5 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Gemini 3.5 Flash was released on 2026-05-19, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 4 months newer than Gemini 3.5 Flash.
May 19, 2026
4 months ago
Sep 3, 2026
2 weeks ago
3mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Gemini 3.5 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-01-31, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Gemini 3.5 Flash's training data extends to 2026-01-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date.
Jan 2026
—
Provider Availability
Gemini 3.5 Flash is available from DeepInfra, Google. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Gemini 3.5 Flash and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Gemini 3.5 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.