# Ling 3.1 Flash vs OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0

> Side-by-side benchmark comparison for Ling 3.1 Flash and OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, multilingual, and math tasks.

- Canonical page: https://benchlm.ai/compare/ling-3-1-flash-vs-orcacyber-nano-1-0
- Last updated: October 20, 2026

- Shared sourced benchmarks: 1
- HTML indexing: indexable
- Ranking lane: BenchAlign v5.8

## Quick Verdict

Evidence is too thin for a benchmark verdict: Ling 3.1 Flash and OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 share only 1 sourced benchmark row.

## Summary

- Only 1 shared sourced benchmark row is available. That is not enough for a broad capability verdict, so this mirror does not name an overall winner.
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 has the lower published output-token price.

## Model Snapshot

| Property | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 |
|----------|----------|----------|
| Creator | InclusionAI | OrcaRouter |
| Type | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Reasoning | Reasoning | Reasoning |
| Context | 262K | 262K |
| Independent public score (not head-to-head) | 68.05 | null |
| Benchmarks Covered | 17 | 7 |
| Pricing (input/output) | Pricing unavailable / Pricing unavailable | $0.00 / $0.00 |

## Category Breakdown

### Agentic

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 62.8 (Estimated · #22/132)
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 | 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% | 72.5% | Ling 3.1 Flash |
| τ³-bench results | 47.8% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| MCP Atlas | 83% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| BrowseComp | 91.7% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| WideResearch | 83.3% | Coming soon | Coming soon |

### Coding

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 57.2 (Estimated · #27/153)
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 | 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% | Coming soon | Coming soon |

### Reasoning

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 82 (Unranked · 2 rankable rows)
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: Coming soon

### Knowledge

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: 63.4 (Supported · #43/187)
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| HealthBench Professional | 65.3% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| HLE | 37.4% | Coming soon | Coming soon |
| GPQA-D | Coming soon | 88.3% | Coming soon |

### Instruction Following

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: Coming soon
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: 32.4 (#134/152)

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| IFEval | Coming soon | 82.8% | Coming soon |
| IFBench | Coming soon | 56.3% | Coming soon |

### Mathematics

- Winner: Insufficient shared evidence
- Ling 3.1 Flash public-lane score: Coming soon
- OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 public-lane score: Coming soon

| Benchmark | Ling 3.1 Flash | OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 | Winner |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|--------|
| AIME 2025 | Coming soon | 96.2% | Coming soon |
| MATH-500 | Coming soon | 98.6% | Coming soon |
| GSM8K | Coming soon | 97.5% | Coming soon |

## FAQ

### Is there enough evidence to pick between Ling 3.1 Flash and OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0?

Not yet. The models share only 1 sourced benchmark row, 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)
- [OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 vs Claude Opus 5.5](/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-orcacyber-nano-1-0)
- [Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol](/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-ling-3-1-flash)
- [OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 vs GPT-6.1 Sol](/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-vs-orcacyber-nano-1-0)

## Explore More

- [Ling 3.1 Flash profile](/models/ling-3-1-flash)
- [OrcaCyber-Nano-1.0 profile](/models/orcacyber-nano-1-0)
- [Compare Pricing](/llm-pricing)
- [Alternative Finder](/tools/alternative-finder)
- [LLM Selector](/tools/llm-selector)
- [Overall Rankings](/best/overall)