The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Nova Lite

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.5.

InclusionAI · Amazon · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.5, 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 Nova Lite

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.06/M input and $0.24/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Nova Lite
Amazon
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
7.5
#303
Reasoning
47.5
#26
7.1
#300
Coding
38.8
#18
5.5
#211
Agents
38.0
#12
4.8
#164
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.24 / M
Context window
—
300,000

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 27 for Nova Lite

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Nova Litedon'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

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Nova Lite specifies input context (300,000 tokens). Only Nova Lite specifies output context (2,048 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Amazon
Nova Lite
Input300,000 tokens
Output2,048 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Nova Lite supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Nova Lite 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

Nova Lite

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Nova Lite was released on 2024-11-20.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 23 months newer than Nova Lite.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.9yr newer
Nova Lite

Nov 20, 2024

1.9 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 Nova Lite side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Nova Lite
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Nova Lite.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Nova Lite?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 7.5. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Nova Lite is made by Amazon. 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 Nova Lite in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Nova Lite scores GSM8k: 94.5%, ARC-C: 92.4%, DocVQA: 92.4%, IFEval: 89.7%, Translation en→Set1 COMET22: 88.8%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Nova Lite?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Nova Lite supports 300K 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 Nova Lite?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 7.5), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Nova Lite?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Nova Lite is developed by Amazon.

Related comparisons