Capability
52.2/100
field median 58.1
#117 of 232 ranked models
Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.
See the free Radar BriefReleased Jul 23, 2026 — see all recent releases
Data as of September 4, 2026 · How the score is built
Share or export
Instruction Following ranks #58. A well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
22 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. No comparable first-party API token rate is published.
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
52.2/100
field median 58.1
#117 of 232 ranked models
Price
API rate not published
input median $1
No comparable first-party hosted token rate
Speed
341tok/s
field median 92 tok/s
First token 8.51 s
Context
262Ktokens
field median 256,000
Maximum output length is tracked separately
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Ling 3.0 Flash category percentile values
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.
Estimate VRAM from known parametersScores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #121 of 151Percentile 20thWeight 22%7 benchmarksVerified | 40.0 | #121 of 151 | 20th | 22% | 7 benchmarks | Verified |
| CodingRank #126 of 183Percentile 31stWeight 20%6 benchmarksVerified | 42.8 | #126 of 183 | 31st | 20% | 6 benchmarks | Verified |
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 17% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| KnowledgeRank #112 of 181Percentile 38thWeight 12%5 benchmarksVerified | 45.9 | #112 of 181 | 38th | 12% | 5 benchmarks | Verified |
| MathRank Not rankedWeight 5%3 benchmarksVerified | 73.7 | Not ranked | Not available | 5% | 3 benchmarks | Verified |
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 7% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| MultimodalWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | Not ranked | Not available | 12% | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
| Inst. FollowingRank #58 of 120Percentile 52ndWeight 5%1 benchmarkVerified | 75.6 | #58 of 120 | 52nd | 5% | 1 benchmark | Verified |
Coding opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Pro | Score56.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 81.2% | Gap24.6 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals)LiveCodeBench, Vals AI run | Score84.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 90.5% | Gap6.5 behind | WeightWeighted 15% | |
| SciCodeScientific Code Benchmark | Score41.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Sakana Fugu · 60.1% | Gap18.9 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Provider exact |
| SWE Multilingual | Score72.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 89.5% | Gap17.1 behind | WeightWeighted 5% | Provider exact |
| LiveCodeBench v5 | Score82.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Ling 3.0 Flash · 82.8% | GapBest verified | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| SWE-bench (Vals)SWE-bench, Vals AI run | Score65.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 97.0% | Gap31.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Verified |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrowseComp | Score72.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.6 Sol · 92.2% | Gap20 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| MCP Atlas | Score65.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Muse Spark 1.1 · 88.1% | Gap22.6 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| skillsBench | Score44.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 70.2% | Gap25.4 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| BFCL v4Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard v4 | Score73.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 75.0% | Gap2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| WideResearch | Score73.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Hy4 preview · 83.9% | Gap10.3 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| DRACOData Research and Analysis with Complex Operations | Score70.4% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Opus 5 · 88.6% | Gap18.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI run | Score50.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3% | Gap37.1 behind | WeightDisplay only |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HLEHumanity's Last Exam | Score22.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 65% | Gap42.3 behind | WeightWeighted 35% | Provider exact |
| MMLU-Pro (Vals)MMLU-Pro, Vals AI run | Score82.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Claude Fable 5.1 · 92.4% | Gap10.4 behind | WeightWeighted 10% | Verified |
| GPQAGraduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A | Score85.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96% | Gap11 behind | WeightWeighted 7% | Provider exact |
| GPQA-DGPQA Diamond | Score85.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 96.0% | Gap11 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals)GPQA Diamond, Vals AI run | Score84.8% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 3.1 Pro · 95.5% | Gap10.7 behind | WeightDisplay only |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26AIME 2026 | Score93.2% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GLM-5.2 · 99.2% | Gap6 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| HMMT Feb 2026Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament February 2026 | Score87.0% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.7 Max · 97.1% | Gap10.1 behind | WeightWeighted 25% | Provider exact |
| IMOAnswerBench | Score83.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: dots3-note Preview · 90.9% | Gap7.2 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchInstruction Following Benchmark | Score74.5% | Versus best verified row Best verified: MAI-Thinking-1 · 85% | Gap10.5 behind | WeightWeighted 70% | Provider exact |
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. A successor's displayed score stays at least 0.1 points above its predecessor; raw benchmark rows do not move. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Apr 21, 2026
Ling 2.6 FlashNot publicly ranked · Price not listed
Jul 23, 2026 · you are here
Ling 3.0 FlashScore 52.2 · Price not listed
Flash
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #117 of 232 on the public leaderboard with a score of 52.2/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Ling 3.0 Flash is a open weight model with a 262K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
InclusionAI publishes the BF16 checkpoint under the MIT License on Hugging Face. The model card documents SGLang and vLLM deployment, thinking mode enabled by default, and a 262,144-token serving context.
Official exact-value snapshot from InclusionAI's Ling-3.0-flash Hugging Face model card. The final checkpoint is a 124B-total, 5.1B-active hybrid-linear MoE with a 256K training schedule and 262,144-token serving context. BenchLM keeps Terminal-Bench 2.1 separate from the weighted Terminal-Bench 2.0 lane, stores the card's July 2024-May 2025 LiveCodeBench window on the v5 lane, and maps only named rows supported by the current schema. BrowseComp uses the single-agent with-context result; the separate multi-agent result is not collapsed into it. Internal or currently unsupported rows remain outside the scored fields.
Ling 3.0 Flash sits in the Ling 3.0 family with Ling 3.0 Flash FP8, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin. Its explicit predecessor is Ling 2.6 Flash. 22 of 422 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Instruction Following at #58, while its lowest eligible position is Coding at #126. a well-rounded choice across a range of tasks.
InclusionAI · Model release
Radar confirmed these at the source. Already tracking Ling 3.0 Flash? See the free Radar Brief for what changes next.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #117 out of 232 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 52.2/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 22 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #112 out of 181 eligible models for knowledge and understanding, with a public category score of 45.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #126 out of 183 eligible models for coding and programming, with a public category score of 42.8/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Ling 3.0 Flash has source-displayable benchmark coverage for mathematics, but the public category table does not assign it a rank there. The individual rows remain available for inspection. A missing category position means the evidence threshold was not met; it does not convert the model's unmeasured work into a zero.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #121 out of 151 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 40/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Ling 3.0 Flash ranks #58 out of 120 eligible models for instruction following, with a public category score of 75.6/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Ling 3.0 Flash is an open-weight model from InclusionAI. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Ling 3.0 Flash belongs to the Ling 3.0 family. Related tracked variants include Ling 3.0 Flash FP8, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin. A sibling link indicates shared lineage or a documented configuration relationship; it does not mean the variants have identical pricing, context limits, benchmark evidence, or deployment behavior. Compare before switching.
No. Ling 3.0 Flash currently has 38 source-displayable rows across 422 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
Ling 3.0 Flash has a documented context window of 262K. That figure is the maximum combined prompt and retained-conversation space reported for this exact model; it is not the maximum output length. The profile keeps output limits separate because providers often publish those limits independently.
Related resources
Last updated September 4, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Get one weekly email when material rank, price, availability, or benchmark evidence changes are worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.