The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Sarvam-105B

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 25.7.

InclusionAI · Sarvam AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the overall LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 25.7, 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 Sarvam-105B

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Ling 3.1 Flash
InclusionAI
Sarvam-105B
Sarvam AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
51.0
#15
25.7
#170
Reasoning
47.5
#26
26.1
#164
Coding
38.8
#18
-1.7
#263
Agents
38.0
#12
5.5
#160
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
— / M
— / M
Output price
— / M
— / M
Context window
—
—

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Ling 3.1 Flash · 14 for Sarvam-105B

No common benchmarks found

Ling 3.1 Flash and Sarvam-105Bdon'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

455.0B diff

Ling 3.1 Flash has 455.0B more parameters than Sarvam-105B, making it 433.3% larger.

InclusionAI
Ling 3.1 Flash
560.0Bparameters
Sarvam AI
Sarvam-105B
105.0Bparameters
560.0B
Ling 3.1 Flash
105.0B
Sarvam-105B

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Ling 3.1 Flash was released on 2026-09-30, while Sarvam-105B was released on 2026-03-06.

Ling 3.1 Flash is 7 months newer than Sarvam-105B.

Ling 3.1 Flash

Sep 30, 2026

1 weeks ago

6mo newer
Sarvam-105B

Mar 6, 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 Sarvam-105B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Ling 3.1 Flash
✓ Preferred
Sarvam-105B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Ling 3.1 Flash vs Sarvam-105B.

Which is better, Ling 3.1 Flash or Sarvam-105B?

Ling 3.1 Flash leads the LLM Stats Score 51.0 to 25.7. Ling 3.1 Flash is made by InclusionAI and Sarvam-105B is made by Sarvam AI. 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 Sarvam-105B in benchmarks?

Ling 3.1 Flash scores CyberGym: 87.9%, DRACO: 85.5%, FrontierSWE: 75.2%, Multi-Challenge: 69.8%, SkillsBench: 68.7%. Sarvam-105B scores MATH-500: 98.6%, AIME 2025: 96.7%, MMLU: 90.6%, HMMT 2025: 85.8%, HMMT25: 85.8%.

What are the main differences between Ling 3.1 Flash and Sarvam-105B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (51.0 vs 25.7), licensing (Unknown vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Ling 3.1 Flash and Sarvam-105B?

Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by InclusionAI and Sarvam-105B is developed by Sarvam AI.

Related comparisons