The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -5.4.

IBM · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -5.4, ranking #39 overall.

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

Choose IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview

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

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.

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
IBM
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-5.4
#356
43.3
#39
Reasoning
-5.4
#346
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
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Finance
-3.7#207
36.7#5
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview 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

117.0B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 117.0B more parameters than IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview, making it 1671.4% larger.

IBM
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
7.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
7.0B
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
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).

IBM
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview was released on 2025-05-02, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 16 months newer than IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview.

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview

May 2, 2025

1.4 years ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

5 days ago

1.3yr 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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -5.4. IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview is made by IBM 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 IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview scores AttaQ: 86.1%, HumanEval: 82.4%, HumanEval+: 78.3%, GSM8k: 70.1%, IFEval: 63.0%. 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 IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview 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 IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-5.4 vs 43.3), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview is developed by IBM and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons