Model comparison
Ling 2.6 Flash vs Llama 4 Scout
Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated); Llama 4 Scout #174 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Ling 2.6 Flash and Llama 4 Scout share 15 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to Ling 2.6 Flash; 3 to Llama 4 Scout.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 15
- Ling 2.6 Flash only
- 3
- Llama 4 Scout only
- 3
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Ling 2.6 Flash and Llama 4 Scout is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Llama 4 Scout has the larger context window at 10M, compared with 262K for Ling 2.6 Flash.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Ling 2.6 Flash | Δ | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Ling 2.6 Flash27.0 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Knowledge | Ling 2.6 Flash59.0 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Ling 2.6 Flash57.0 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 ScoutNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Ling 2.6 Flash | Llama 4 Scout | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Ling 2.6 FlashNot available | Llama 4 Scout$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Ling 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/s | Llama 4 Scout128 tok/s | Ling 2.6 Flash has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Ling 2.6 Flash1.07 s | Llama 4 Scout0.70 s | Llama 4 Scout reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Ling 2.6 Flash262K | Llama 4 Scout10M | Llama 4 Scout lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Ling 2.6 Flash | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.1% | 10.0% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| GPQASource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 59.3% | 58.7% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 6.2% | 4.3% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -65.7% | -52.4% | Llama 4 Scout leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 15.4% | 14.6% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 95.8% | 78.3% | Llama 4 Scout leads |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Ling 2.6 Flash | Llama 4 Scout | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | — | 0.000% | Not comparable |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Ling 2.6 Flash and Llama 4 Scout on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Ling 2.6 Flash and Llama 4 Scout today?
Ling 2.6 Flash: Pricing unavailable Llama 4 Scout: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.