Ling 3.1 Flash vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -3.8.
InclusionAI · Microsoft · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.1 to -3.8, ranking #14 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 51.1 and ranks #14 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 Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Individual benchmarks
11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 31 for Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Ling 3.1 Flash and Phi-3.5-mini-instructdon'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
Ling 3.1 Flash has 556.2B more parameters than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct, making it 14636.8% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Phi-3.5-mini-instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Phi-3.5-mini-instruct was released on 2024-08-23.
Ling 3.1 Flash is 26 months newer than Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.
Sep 30, 2026
1 weeks ago
2.1yr newerAug 23, 2024
2.1 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Ling 3.1 Flash and Phi-3.5-mini-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct.