The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3 Max Thinking

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 32.8.

InclusionAI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 32.8, ranking #15 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ling 3.1 Flash wins 1; 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 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3 Max Thinking

  • you want predictable pricing at $1.20/M input and $6.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
51.0
#15
32.8
#117
47.5
#26
33.9
#104
38.8
#18
16.2
#140
38.0
#12
9.9
#133
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
— / M
$1.20 / M
Output price
— / M
$6.00 / M
Context window
—
256,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
Qwen3 Max Thinking
29.0#16
3.2#175
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 34 for Qwen3 Max Thinking

1 shared

Ling 3.1 Flash outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Multi-Challenge), while Qwen3 Max Thinking 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

440.0B diff

Qwen3 Max Thinking has 440.0B more parameters than Ling 3.1 Flash, making it 78.6% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 Max Thinking
1.0Tparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
1000.0B
Qwen3 Max Thinking

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen3 Max Thinking specifies input context (256,000 tokens). Only Qwen3 Max Thinking specifies output context (256,000 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Input256,000 tokens
Output256,000 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 Qwen3 Max Thinking was released on 2026-02-13.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 8 months newer than Qwen3 Max Thinking.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

7mo newer
Qwen3 Max Thinking

Feb 13, 2026

7 months 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 Qwen3 Max Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3 Max Thinking.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 32.8. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Qwen3 Max Thinking is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. 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 Qwen3 Max Thinking in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Qwen3 Max Thinking scores C-Eval: 93.7%, IFEval: 93.4%, AIME 2026: 93.3%, MMLU-Redux: 92.8%, GPQA: 87.4%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen3 Max Thinking supports 256K 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 Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 32.8), licensing (Unknown vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 Max Thinking?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Qwen3 Max Thinking is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.