The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Kimi K2 0905 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 21.6.

Moonshot AI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 21.6, ranking #15 overall.

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

Choose Kimi K2 0905

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.60/M input and $2.50/M output

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 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.

Kimi K2 0905
Moonshot AI
Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
21.6
#201
51.0
#15
Reasoning
22.0
#188
47.5
#26
Coding
19.4
#113
38.8
#18
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.60 / M
— / M
Output price
$2.50 / M
— / M
Context window
262,144
—

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Kimi K2 0905 · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Kimi K2 0905 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

440.0B diff

Kimi K2 0905 has 440.0B more parameters than Ling 3.1 Flash, making it 78.6% larger.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2 0905
1.0Tparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
1000.0B
Kimi K2 0905
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Kimi K2 0905 specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Kimi K2 0905 specifies output context (262,144 tokens).

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2 0905
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Kimi K2 0905 was released on 2025-09-05, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 13 months newer than Kimi K2 0905.

Kimi K2 0905

Sep 5, 2025

1.1 years ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.1yr 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 Kimi K2 0905 and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Kimi K2 0905
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Kimi K2 0905 vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Kimi K2 0905 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 21.6. Kimi K2 0905 is made by Moonshot AI 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 Kimi K2 0905 compare to Ling 3.1 Flash in benchmarks?

Kimi K2 0905 scores HumanEval: 94.5%, MMLU: 90.2%, MATH: 89.1%, MMLU-Pro: 82.5%, GPQA: 75.8%. Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%.

What are the context window sizes for Kimi K2 0905 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Kimi K2 0905 supports 262K tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Kimi K2 0905 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (21.6 vs 51.0), licensing (Proprietary vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Kimi K2 0905 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Kimi K2 0905 is developed by Moonshot AI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons