The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 36.0.

InclusionAI · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 36.0, ranking #15 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.1 Flash wins 2; 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 3.1 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 value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
36.0
#93
Reasoning
47.5
#26
35.1
#95
Coding
38.8
#18
20.4
#108
Agents
38.0
#12
12.0
#118
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
— / M
$0.50 / M
Output price
— / M
$2.20 / M
Context window
—
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)
Tool use
29.0#16
0.4#189
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 26 for Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

2 shared

Ling 3.1 Flash outperforms in 2 benchmarks (Finance Agent v2, Multi-Challenge), while Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) is better at 0 benchmarks.

Ling 3.1 Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

10.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 10.0B more parameters than Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B), making it 1.8% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)
550.0Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
550.0B
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) specifies input context (262,144 tokens). Only Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) specifies output context (262,144 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) was released on 2026-06-04.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 4 months newer than Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B).

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

3mo newer
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

Jun 4, 2026

4 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-09-30, while Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)'s training data extends to 2025-09-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date.

Ling 3.1 Flash

—

Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)

Sep 2025

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Ling 3.1 Flash and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B).

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 36.0. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) 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 3.1 Flash compare to Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) scores RULER: 94.7%, IMO-AnswerBench: 92.3%, PinchBench: 90.0%, LiveCodeBench v6: 89.0%, GPQA: 87.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) supports 262K 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 Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 36.0), licensing (Unknown vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B)?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Nemotron 3 Ultra (550B A55B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons