Skip to main content

Model comparison

Ling 3.0 Flash vs Llama 3.1 405B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

No sourced benchmark result is currently shared by both models. This page therefore compares only the available metadata, pricing, and runtime rows; it does not name a quality winner.
InclusionAI
N/A
No comparison
50.94/100
0 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Ling 3.0 Flash unranked (Not scored); Llama 3.1 405B #107 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Ling 3.0 Flash and Llama 3.1 405B share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Ling 3.0 Flash; 11 to Llama 3.1 405B.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
0
Ling 3.0 Flash only
0
Llama 3.1 405B only
11
Comparable categories
0 / 8

Benchmark data for Ling 3.0 Flash and Llama 3.1 405B is coming soon on BenchLM.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Ling 3.0 Flash yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.

Ling 3.0 Flash has the larger context window at 262K, compared with 128K for Llama 3.1 405B.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensLing 3.0 FlashNot availableLlama 3.1 405B$0 input / $0 outputA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondLing 3.0 FlashNot availableLlama 3.1 405B29 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenLing 3.0 FlashNot availableLlama 3.1 405B2.19 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensLing 3.0 Flash262KLlama 3.1 405B128KLing 3.0 Flash lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BResult
τ²-bench resultsSource 19%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-SciCodeSource 29.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-LCRSource 24.3%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 8.5%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.5%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 4.2%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -17.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 22.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 51.0%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkLing 3.0 FlashLlama 3.1 405BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 39.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Can I compare Ling 3.0 Flash and Llama 3.1 405B 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 3.0 Flash and Llama 3.1 405B today?

Ling 3.0 Flash: Pricing unavailable Llama 3.1 405B: $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.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026