The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GLM-5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched at 37.1 and 43.2 on the LLM Stats Score. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 17.2x cheaper per token.

Zhipu AI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 37.1 and 43.2.

On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 17.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin also accepts a larger context window (262,144 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 GLM-5

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

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 17.2x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 262,144 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GLM-5
Zhipu AI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
37.1
#69
43.2
#41
Reasoning
37.4
#66
44.6
#33
Agents
19.8
#61
29.5
#36
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$1.00 / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
$3.20 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
200,000
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
GLM-5
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Tool use
18.0#69
20.4#57
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

5 reported for GLM-5 · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

GLM-5 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

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs less

For input processing, GLM-5 ($1.00/1M tokens) is 16.7x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, GLM-5 ($3.20/1M tokens) is 17.8x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GLM-5 is more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Sep 14 2026 • llm-stats.com
Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input tokens$1.00
Output tokens$3.20
Best providerFriendliAI
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

620.0B diff

GLM-5 has 620.0B more parameters than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin, making it 500.0% larger.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
744.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
744.0B
GLM-5
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to GLM-5's 200,000 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while GLM-5 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Zhipu AI
GLM-5
Input200,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Mon Sep 14 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GLM-5 was released on 2026-02-11, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 7 months newer than GLM-5.

GLM-5

Feb 11, 2026

7 months ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

1 weeks ago

6mo 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

Provider Availability

GLM-5 is available from FriendliAI, ZAI. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.

GLM-5

friendli logo
FriendliAI
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M
z logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.20/1M

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GLM-5
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GLM-5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, GLM-5 or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 37.1 and 43.2. GLM-5 is made by Zhipu AI 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 GLM-5 compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

GLM-5 scores t2-bench: 89.7%, SWE-Bench Verified: 77.8%, BrowseComp: 75.9%, MCP Atlas: 67.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 56.2%. 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%.

Is GLM-5 cheaper than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 16.7x cheaper for input tokens. GLM-5 costs $1.00/M input and $3.20/M output via friendli. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GLM-5 supports 200K 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 GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (37.1 vs 43.2), context window (200K vs 262K), input pricing ($1.00 vs $0.06/M), licensing (MIT vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GLM-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GLM-5 is developed by Zhipu AI and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons