The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs MedGemma 4B IT

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -4.5.

InclusionAI · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -4.5, ranking #39 overall.

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

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

Choose MedGemma 4B IT

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
MedGemma 4B IT
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
43.3
#39
-4.5
#347
Reasoning
44.7
#32
-5.0
#344
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.06 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
— / M
Context window
262,144
—

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin · 7 for MedGemma 4B IT

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MedGemma 4B ITdon'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

119.7B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 119.7B more parameters than MedGemma 4B IT, making it 2783.7% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
Google
MedGemma 4B IT
4.3Bparameters
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
4.3B
MedGemma 4B IT

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).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Google
MedGemma 4B IT
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

MedGemma 4B IT supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

MedGemma 4B IT can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Text
Images
Audio
Video

MedGemma 4B IT

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03, while MedGemma 4B IT was released on 2025-05-20.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 16 months newer than MedGemma 4B IT.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

5 days ago

1.3yr newer
MedGemma 4B IT

May 20, 2025

1.3 years ago

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 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MedGemma 4B IT side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
✓ Preferred
MedGemma 4B IT
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs MedGemma 4B IT.

Which is better, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or MedGemma 4B IT?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.3 to -4.5. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI and MedGemma 4B IT is made by Google. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Ling 3.0 Flash Fin compare to MedGemma 4B IT in benchmarks?

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%. MedGemma 4B IT scores MIMIC CXR: 88.9%, DermMCQA: 71.8%, PathMCQA: 69.8%, SlakeVQA: 62.3%, VQA-Rad: 49.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MedGemma 4B IT?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens and MedGemma 4B IT 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 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MedGemma 4B IT?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.3 vs -4.5), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Health AI Developer Foundations terms of use). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MedGemma 4B IT?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI and MedGemma 4B IT is developed by Google.

Related comparisons