The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Muse Spark 1.1

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1 are closely matched at 43.3 and 49.7 on the LLM Stats Score. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 22.2x cheaper per token.

InclusionAI · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1 are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 43.3 and 49.7.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is roughly 22.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Muse Spark 1.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 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 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • cost matters — it's about 22.2x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Muse Spark 1.1

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
InclusionAI
Muse Spark 1.1
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
43.3
#39
49.7
#17
Reasoning
44.7
#32
50.1
#13
Agents
29.5
#35
34.8
#20
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$0.06 / M
$1.25 / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
$4.25 / M
Context window
262,144
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Muse Spark 1.1
Tool use
20.5#56
31.7#9
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin · 11 for Muse Spark 1.1

1 shared

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Finance Agent v2), while Muse Spark 1.1 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

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, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.06/1M tokens) is 20.8x cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1 ($1.25/1M tokens).

For output processing, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin ($0.18/1M tokens) is 23.6x cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1 ($4.25/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Muse Spark 1.1 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
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com
InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input tokens$1.25
Output tokens$4.25
Best providerMeta
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Spark 1.1 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Ling 3.0 Flash Fin's 262,144 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Muse Spark 1.1 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Tue Sep 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Muse Spark 1.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.0 Flash Fin does not.

Muse Spark 1.1 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

Muse Spark 1.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin was released on 2026-09-03, while Muse Spark 1.1 was released on 2026-07-09.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 2 months newer than Muse Spark 1.1.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Sep 3, 2026

5 days ago

1mo newer
Muse Spark 1.1

Jul 9, 2026

2 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

Provider Availability

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is available from DeepInfra. Muse Spark 1.1 is available from Meta Model API.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M

Muse Spark 1.1

meta logo
Meta
Input Price:Input: $1.25/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.25/1M
* 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 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
✓ Preferred
Muse Spark 1.1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.0 Flash Fin vs Muse Spark 1.1.

Which is better, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin or Muse Spark 1.1?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1 are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 43.3 and 49.7. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is made by InclusionAI and Muse Spark 1.1 is made by Meta. 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 Muse Spark 1.1 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%. Muse Spark 1.1 scores CharXiv-R: 88.4%, MCP Atlas: 88.1%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 80.0%, BabyVision: 76.3%.

Is Ling 3.0 Flash Fin cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is 20.8x cheaper for input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra. Muse Spark 1.1 costs $1.25/M input and $4.25/M output via meta.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin supports 262K tokens and Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1.0M 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 Muse Spark 1.1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (43.3 vs 49.7), context window (262K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.06 vs $1.25/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.0 Flash Fin and Muse Spark 1.1?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is developed by InclusionAI and Muse Spark 1.1 is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons