The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

GPT-5.3 Codex vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched at 36.6 and 43.3 on the LLM Stats Score. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 53.5x cheaper per token.

OpenAI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 36.6 and 43.3.

On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 53.5x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

GPT-5.3 Codex also accepts a larger context window (400,000 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 GPT-5.3 Codex

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 400,000 token context window

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • cost matters — it's about 53.5x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

GPT-5.3 Codex
OpenAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
36.6
#74
43.3
#39
Reasoning
37.3
#68
44.7
#32
Agents
22.9
#55
29.5
#35
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$1.75 / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
$14.00 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
400,000
262,144

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for GPT-5.3 Codex · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

GPT-5.3 Codex 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, GPT-5.3 Codex ($1.75/1M tokens) is 29.2x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, GPT-5.3 Codex ($14.00/1M tokens) is 77.8x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, GPT-5.3 Codex 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
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com
OpenAI
GPT-5.3 Codex
Input tokens$1.75
Output tokens$14.00
Best providerOpenAI
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

GPT-5.3 Codex accepts 400,000 input tokens compared to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's 262,144 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while GPT-5.3 Codex is limited to 128,000 tokens.

OpenAI
GPT-5.3 Codex
Input400,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

GPT-5.3 Codex supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

GPT-5.3 Codex can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

GPT-5.3 Codex

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

GPT-5.3 Codex was released on 2026-02-05, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 7 months newer than GPT-5.3 Codex.

GPT-5.3 Codex

Feb 5, 2026

7 months ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

5 days ago

7mo 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

GPT-5.3 Codex is available from OpenAI. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.

GPT-5.3 Codex

openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $1.75/1MOutput Price:Output: $14.00/1M

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 GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

GPT-5.3 Codex
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about GPT-5.3 Codex vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, GPT-5.3 Codex or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 36.6 and 43.3. GPT-5.3 Codex is made by OpenAI 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 GPT-5.3 Codex compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

GPT-5.3 Codex scores SWE-Lancer (IC-Diamond subset): 81.4%, Cybersecurity CTFs: 77.6%, Terminal-Bench 2.0: 77.3%, LiveBench: 72.8%, OSWorld-Verified: 64.7%. 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 GPT-5.3 Codex cheaper than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 29.2x cheaper for input tokens. GPT-5.3 Codex costs $1.75/M input and $14.00/M output via openai. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GPT-5.3 Codex supports 400K 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 GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (36.6 vs 43.3), context window (400K vs 262K), input pricing ($1.75 vs $0.06/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes GPT-5.3 Codex and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

GPT-5.3 Codex is developed by OpenAI and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons