The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs MiniCPM-SALA

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.0 to 14.4.

InclusionAI · OpenBMB · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.0 to 14.4, ranking #44 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 43.0 and ranks #44 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose MiniCPM-SALA

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
43.0
#44
14.4
#236
44.2
#35
15.7
#221
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 · 24 for MiniCPM-SALA

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MiniCPM-SALAdon'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

114.5B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 114.5B more parameters than MiniCPM-SALA, making it 1208.4% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
9.5Bparameters
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
9.5B
MiniCPM-SALA

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
OpenBMB
MiniCPM-SALA
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03, while MiniCPM-SALA was released on 2026-02-11.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 7 months newer than MiniCPM-SALA.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

2 weeks ago

6mo newer
MiniCPM-SALA

Feb 11, 2026

7 months 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 MiniCPM-SALA side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
✓ Preferred
MiniCPM-SALA
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs MiniCPM-SALA.

Which is better, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or MiniCPM-SALA?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.0 to 14.4. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI and MiniCPM-SALA is made by OpenBMB. 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 MiniCPM-SALA 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%. MiniCPM-SALA scores HumanEval: 95.1%, RULER 64k: 92.7%, RULER 128k: 89.4%, MBPP: 89.1%, RULER 512K: 87.1%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MiniCPM-SALA?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens and MiniCPM-SALA 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 MiniCPM-SALA?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.0 vs 14.4), licensing (Unknown vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and MiniCPM-SALA?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI and MiniCPM-SALA is developed by OpenBMB.