Nova Lite 1.0 vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads Nova Lite 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.1 to 6.7, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 2.0x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $0.24 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nova Lite 1.0 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Lite 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Nova Lite 1.0 for a larger context window (300K against 262K tokens).
- Shared results
- 4
- Nova Lite 1.0 only
- 37
- Ling 3.0 Flash only
- 20
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 20.1 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a AA Agentic Index result, 19.3.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 84.8%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 82.0%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.0002, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has the number, $0.05.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- General, 54.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Nova Lite 1.0 19.0% against Ling 3.0 Flash 73.0%, 54.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash 262K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Nova Lite 1.0 | Bars | Ling 3.0 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 4 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 50.6 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 2.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 16.7% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.8% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1239 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1241 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 6.7 | 20.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 19.3 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 0.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 25.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 17.5% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 43.3% | 85.5% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.3% | 23.7% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1220 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1201 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1226 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1227 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1235 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 82.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 32.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| MMLU | 77.0% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1232 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1213 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1238 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1219 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| IFBench | 34.1% | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 19.0% | 73.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LMArena Text | 1229 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1205 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1197 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 990 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1243 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1208 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1225 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1229 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1153 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1153 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1238 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1226 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1216 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1199 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1234 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1211 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1176 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 999 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Lite 1.0 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | inclusionAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | July 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 300K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.0405 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.24 | $0.1215 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 29.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.05 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nova Lite 1.0 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Lite 1.0 for a larger context window (300K against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Cost per solved task is known for Ling 3.0 Flash only.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nova Lite 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Ling 3.0 Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.