The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.2 to 4.2.

InclusionAI · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the overall LLM Stats Score 43.2 to 4.2, ranking #41 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 43.2 and ranks #41 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

  • 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
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct
Mistral AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
43.2
#41
4.2
#301
Reasoning
44.6
#33
4.2
#295
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.06 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
— / M
Context window
262,144
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct
Finance
36.7#5
7.3#159
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin · 9 for Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instructdon'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

100.0B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has 100.0B more parameters than Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct, making it 416.7% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
124.0Bparameters
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct
24.0Bparameters
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
24.0B
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

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
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Sep 11 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct 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

Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03, while Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct was released on 2025-03-17.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 18 months newer than Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.5yr newer
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct

Mar 17, 2025

1.5 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 Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
✓ Preferred
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct.

Which is better, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin leads the LLM Stats Score 43.2 to 4.2. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct is made by Mistral AI. 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 Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct 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%. Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct scores HumanEval: 88.4%, MMLU: 80.6%, TriviaQA: 80.5%, MBPP: 74.7%, MATH: 69.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct 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 Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.2 vs 4.2), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI and Mistral Small 3.1 24B Instruct is developed by Mistral AI.

Related comparisons