The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched at 51.0 and 48.3 on the LLM Stats Score.

InclusionAI · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the overall LLM Stats Score at 51.0 and 48.3.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Ling 3.1 Flash

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.15/M input and $0.47/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Qwen3.8 Flash
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
48.3
#29
Reasoning
47.5
#26
48.4
#21
Coding
38.8
#18
34.0
#37
Agents
38.0
#12
33.2
#31
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
— / M
$0.47 / M
Context window
—
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Ling 3.1 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash
Tool use
29.0#16
29.0#15
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 22 for Qwen3.8 Flash

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flashdon'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

435.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 435.0B more parameters than Qwen3.8 Flash, making it 348.0% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
125.0Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
125.0B
Qwen3.8 Flash

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Qwen3.8 Flash specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Qwen3.8 Flash specifies output context (131,072 tokens).

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8 Flash
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Thu Oct 08 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ling 3.1 Flash does not.

Qwen3.8 Flash 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

Qwen3.8 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Qwen3.8 Flash was released on 2026-08-26.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 1 month newer than Qwen3.8 Flash.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

1mo newer
Qwen3.8 Flash

Aug 26, 2026

1 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 Qwen3.8 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8 Flash
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash are closely matched on the LLM Stats Score at 51.0 and 48.3. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Qwen3.8 Flash 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 Qwen3.8 Flash in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Qwen3.8 Flash scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

What are the context window sizes for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash supports an unknown number of tokens and Qwen3.8 Flash supports 1.0M 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 Qwen3.8 Flash?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 48.3), 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 Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Qwen3.8 Flash is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons