The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.0 to -10.6.

Google · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.0 to -10.6, ranking #44 overall.

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

Choose Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

  • you are already invested in the Google ecosystem

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • overall performance matters — it scores 43.0 and ranks #44 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.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Google
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-10.6
#368
43.0
#44
Reasoning
-11.0
#360
44.2
#35
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
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Finance
-9.7#225
36.7#5
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

18 reported for Gemma 3n E2B Instructed · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed 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

116.0B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 116.0B more parameters than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed, making it 1450.0% larger.

Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
8.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
8.0B
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
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).

Google
Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed was released on 2025-06-26, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 14 months newer than Gemma 3n E2B Instructed.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 26, 2025

1.2 years ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

2 weeks ago

1.2yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E2B Instructed's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's cutoff date.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed

Jun 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Gemma 3n E2B Instructed vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, Gemma 3n E2B Instructed or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.0 to -10.6. Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is made by Google 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed scores HumanEval: 66.5%, MMLU: 60.1%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 59.0%, MBPP: 56.6%, Global-MMLU: 55.1%. 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed 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 Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-10.6 vs 43.0), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Gemma 3n E2B Instructed and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Gemma 3n E2B Instructed is developed by Google and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons