The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -5.5.

IBM · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -5.5, ranking #14 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 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.1 and ranks #14 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — 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 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-5.5
#373
51.1
#14
Reasoning
-5.5
#363
47.7
#25
Coding
2.9
#233
39.2
#17
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
—

Individual benchmarks

12 reported for IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.1 Flashdon'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

553.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 553.0B more parameters than IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview, making it 7900.0% larger.

IBM
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
7.0Bparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
7.0B
IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview was released on 2025-05-02, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 17 months newer than IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview.

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview

May 2, 2025

1.4 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.4yr 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?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -5.5. IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview is made by IBM and Ling 3.1 Flash 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 3.1 Flash 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 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the main differences between IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-5.5 vs 51.1), 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 3.1 Flash?

IBM Granite 4.0 Tiny Preview is developed by IBM and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons