The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Kimi K2.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 38.9. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 13.3x cheaper per token.

Moonshot AI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 38.9, ranking #39 overall.

On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 13.3x 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 Kimi K2.5

  • 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 and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 13.3x 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.

Kimi K2.5
Moonshot AI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
38.9
#60
43.3
#39
Reasoning
38.8
#58
44.7
#32
Agents
18.5
#67
29.5
#35
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.60 / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
$3.00 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
262,100
262,144

Individual benchmarks

40 reported for Kimi K2.5 · 6 for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

No common benchmarks found

Kimi K2.5 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, Kimi K2.5 ($0.60/1M tokens) is 10.0x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, Kimi K2.5 ($3.00/1M tokens) is 16.7x more expensive than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Kimi K2.5 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
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input tokens$0.60
Output tokens$3.00
Best providerFireworks
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

876.0B diff

Kimi K2.5 has 876.0B more parameters than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin, making it 706.5% larger.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
1.0Tparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
1000.0B
Kimi K2.5
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 Kimi K2.5's 262,100 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Kimi K2.5 is limited to 262,100 tokens.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input262,100 tokens
Output262,100 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Kimi K2.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

Kimi K2.5 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Kimi K2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Kimi K2.5 was released on 2026-01-27, while Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 7 months newer than Kimi K2.5.

Kimi K2.5

Jan 27, 2026

7 months ago

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

6 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

Kimi K2.5 is available from Fireworks, Moonshot AI. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra.

Kimi K2.5

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M
moonshot logo
Unknown Organization
Input Price:Input: $0.60/1MOutput Price:Output: $3.00/1M

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 Kimi K2.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Kimi K2.5
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Kimi K2.5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin.

Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to 38.9. Kimi K2.5 is made by Moonshot 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 Kimi K2.5 compare to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin in benchmarks?

Kimi K2.5 scores AIME 2025: 96.1%, HMMT 2025: 95.4%, InfoVQAtest: 92.6%, OCRBench: 92.3%, MathVista-Mini: 90.1%. 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 Kimi K2.5 cheaper than Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 10.0x cheaper for input tokens. Kimi K2.5 costs $0.60/M input and $3.00/M output via fireworks. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Kimi K2.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Kimi K2.5 supports 262K 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 Kimi K2.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (38.9 vs 43.3), context window (262K vs 262K), input pricing ($0.60 vs $0.06/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (MIT vs Unknown). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Kimi K2.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Kimi K2.5 is developed by Moonshot AI and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons