The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 2.8.

InclusionAI · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 2.8, 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 — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
2.8
#328
Reasoning
47.5
#26
-0.2
#336
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.05 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.10 / M
Context window
—
128,000

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 15 for Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Phi-4-multimodal-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

554.4B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 554.4B more parameters than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct, making it 9900.0% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Microsoft
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
5.6Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
5.6B
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Phi-4-multimodal-instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Phi-4-multimodal-instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Microsoft
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct 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

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Phi-4-multimodal-instruct was released on 2025-02-01.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 20 months newer than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.7yr newer
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Feb 1, 2025

1.7 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Phi-4-multimodal-instruct's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ling 3.1 Flash's cutoff date.

Ling 3.1 Flash

—

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Jun 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

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

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 2.8. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is made by Microsoft. 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct scores ScienceQA Visual: 97.5%, DocVQA: 93.2%, MMBench: 86.7%, POPE: 85.6%, OCRBench: 84.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct supports 128K 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 2.8), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Unknown vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons