# Ling 3.1 Flash vs Mercury 3

> Side-by-side benchmark comparison for Ling 3.1 Flash and Mercury 3 across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, multilingual, and math tasks.

- Canonical page: https://benchlm.ai/compare/ling-3-1-flash-vs-mercury-3
- Last updated: October 19, 2026

- Shared sourced benchmarks: 2
- HTML indexing: indexable
- Ranking lane: BenchAlign v5.8

## Quick Verdict

Evidence is too thin for a benchmark verdict: Ling 3.1 Flash and Mercury 3 share only 2 sourced benchmark rows.

## Summary

- Only 2 shared sourced benchmark rows are available. That is not enough for a broad capability verdict, so this mirror does not name an overall winner.
- Ling 3.1 Flash has the lower published output-token price.
- Mercury 3 has the larger published context window at 1M.

## Model Snapshot

| Property | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 |
|----------|----------|----------|
| Creator | InclusionAI | Inception |
| Type | Open Weight | Proprietary |
| Reasoning | Reasoning | Reasoning |
| Context | 262K | 1M |
| Independent public score (not head-to-head) | 68.08 | null |
| Benchmarks Covered | 17 | 8 |
| Pricing (input/output) | Pricing unavailable / Pricing unavailable | $0.10 / $0.35 |

## Category Breakdown

### Agentic

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 62.8 (Estimated · #22/130)
- Mercury 3 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| skillsBench | 68.7% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| AutomationBench | 52.5% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| CyberGym | 87.9% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| Finance Agent v2 | 57.9% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| DRACO | 85.5% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 81.2% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| τ³-bench results | 47.8% | 30.2% | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| MCP Atlas | 83% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| BrowseComp | 91.7% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| WideResearch | 83.3% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| BrowseComp+ | Coming soon | 55.18% | Coming soon |
| DeepSearchQA | Coming soon | 71.3% | Coming soon |

### Coding

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 57.2 (Estimated · #27/151)
- Mercury 3 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| terminalBench4 | 46.0% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| SWE-Atlas Codebase QnA | 64.5% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| SWE Multilingual | 88.5% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| SWE-bench Pro | 68.7% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| DeepSWE | 59.7% | 46.3% | Ling 3.1 Flash |

### Reasoning

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 82 (Unranked · 2 rankable rows)
- Mercury 3 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| MRCRv2 | Coming soon | 75.5% | Coming soon |

### Knowledge

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 63.4 (Supported · #43/186)
- Mercury 3 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| HealthBench Professional | 65.3% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| HLE | 37.4% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| GPQA-D | Coming soon | 89.2% | Coming soon |

### Instruction Following

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: Coming soon
- Mercury 3 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 3 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| IFBench | Coming soon | 76.8% | Coming soon |
| MultiChallenge (provider reports) | Coming soon | 60.35% | Coming soon |

## FAQ

### Is there enough evidence to pick between Ling 3.1 Flash and Mercury 3?

Not yet. The models share only 2 sourced benchmark rows, so this mirror reports the available measurements and metadata without naming a broad winner.

### What can I compare safely on this page?

Published pricing, context windows, model type, and individual shared benchmark rows are directly comparable. Independent overall scores and non-overlapping benchmark coverage are labeled separately and should not be read as a controlled head-to-head result.

## Related Comparisons

- [Ling 3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5](/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-ling-3-1-flash)
- [Mercury 3 vs Claude Opus 5.5](/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-mercury-3)
- [Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol](/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-ling-3-1-flash)
- [Mercury 3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol](/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-mercury-3)

## Explore More

- [Ling 3.1 Flash profile](/models/ling-3-1-flash)
- [Mercury 3 profile](/models/mercury-3)
- [Compare Pricing](/llm-pricing)
- [Alternative Finder](/tools/alternative-finder)
- [LLM Selector](/tools/llm-selector)
- [Overall Rankings](/best/overall)