The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.8.

InclusionAI · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.8, ranking #15 overall.

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

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • overall performance matters — it scores 51.0 and ranks #15 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Llama 4 Scout

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Llama 4 Scout
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
7.8
#299
Reasoning
47.5
#26
6.6
#302
Coding
38.8
#18
0.3
#255
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.08 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.30 / M
Context window
—
10,000,000

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 12 for Llama 4 Scout

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Scoutdon'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

451.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 451.0B more parameters than Llama 4 Scout, making it 413.8% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
109.0Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
109.0B
Llama 4 Scout

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 4 Scout specifies input context (10,000,000 tokens). Only Llama 4 Scout specifies output context (10,000,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input10,000,000 tokens
Output10,000,000 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Llama 4 Scout supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

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

Ling 3.1 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 4 Scout

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 18 months newer than Llama 4 Scout.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.5yr newer
Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 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?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Scout side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Llama 4 Scout
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Llama 4 Scout?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.8. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Llama 4 Scout 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 3.1 Flash compare to Llama 4 Scout in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Llama 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Scout?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 4 Scout supports 10.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Scout?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 7.8), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Llama 4 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Llama 4 Scout?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons