The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Kimi K2.5 vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 38.6.

Moonshot AI · InclusionAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 38.6, ranking #15 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.1 Flash wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

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 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • 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 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
38.6
#73
51.0
#15
Reasoning
38.5
#73
47.5
#26
Coding
24.5
#83
38.8
#18
Agents
17.7
#86
38.0
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 2
2 of 2
Input price
$0.60 / M
— / M
Output price
$3.00 / M
— / M
Context window
262,100
—

Individual benchmarks

40 reported for Kimi K2.5 · 11 for Ling 3.1 Flash

2 shared

Kimi K2.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Ling 3.1 Flash is better at 2 benchmarks (CyberGym, FrontierSWE).

Ling 3.1 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

440.0B diff

Kimi K2.5 has 440.0B more parameters than Ling 3.1 Flash, making it 78.6% larger.

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
1.0Tparameters
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
1000.0B
Kimi K2.5
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Kimi K2.5 specifies input context (262,100 tokens). Only Kimi K2.5 specifies output context (262,100 tokens).

Moonshot AI
Kimi K2.5
Input262,100 tokens
Output262,100 tokens
InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Kimi K2.5 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash 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 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Kimi K2.5 was released on 2026-01-27, while Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 8 months newer than Kimi K2.5.

Kimi K2.5

Jan 27, 2026

8 months ago

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

8mo 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 K2.5 and Ling 3.1 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Kimi K2.5
✓ Preferred
Ling 3.1 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Kimi K2.5 vs Ling 3.1 Flash.

Which is better, Kimi K2.5 or Ling 3.1 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 38.6. Kimi K2.5 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 K2.5 compare to Ling 3.1 Flash 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 3.1 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 K2.5 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Kimi K2.5 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 K2.5 and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (38.6 vs 51.0), 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 3.1 Flash?

Kimi K2.5 is developed by Moonshot AI and Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI.

Related comparisons