The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.0 Flash vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Ling 3.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 35.9 to 21.8.

InclusionAI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.0 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 35.9 to 21.8, ranking #100 overall.

In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.0 Flash wins 3; 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 Ling 3.0 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 35.9 and ranks #100 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 3 of 5 exact shared results

Choose Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.0 Flash
InclusionAI
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
35.9
#100
21.8
#203
Reasoning
35.2
#99
19.6
#216
Coding
24.4
#90
2.8
#244
Agents
19.0
#88
-1.8
#203
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
3 of 5
2 of 5
Input price
$0.06 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.18 / M
— / M
Context window
131,072
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Ling 3.0 Flash
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Math
29.7#88
12.1#246
Tool use
16.3#96
-2.2#206
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

19 reported for Ling 3.0 Flash · 10 for Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

5 shared

Ling 3.0 Flash outperforms in 3 benchmarks (GDPval-AA, Tau3 Banking, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is better at 2 benchmarks (AA-LCR, IFBench).

Ling 3.0 Flash has a slight edge in benchmark performance.

Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

120.0B diff

Ling 3.0 Flash has 120.0B more parameters than Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B), making it 3000.0% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash
124.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
4.0Bparameters
124.0B
Ling 3.0 Flash
4.0B
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Ling 3.0 Flash specifies input context (131,072 tokens). Only Ling 3.0 Flash specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Fri Oct 23 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.0 Flash was released on 2026-08-04, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) was released on 2026-10-16.

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is 2 months newer than Ling 3.0 Flash.

Ling 3.0 Flash

Aug 4, 2026

2 months ago

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Oct 16, 2026

6 days ago

2mo 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 Ling 3.0 Flash and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.0 Flash
✓ Preferred
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.0 Flash vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B).

Which is better, Ling 3.0 Flash or Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Ling 3.0 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 35.9 to 21.8. Ling 3.0 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Ling 3.0 Flash compare to Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) in benchmarks?

Ling 3.0 Flash scores AIME 2026: 93.2%, Multi-IF: 87.7%, HMMT Feb 26: 87.0%, IMO-AnswerBench: 83.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 82.8%. Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) scores IFBench: 77.9%, GPQA: 72.4%, AA-LCR: 71.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 59.5%, SciCode: 34.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.0 Flash and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Ling 3.0 Flash supports 131K tokens and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) 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 and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (35.9 vs 21.8), licensing (Unknown vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.0 Flash and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Ling 3.0 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons