Claude Opus 4.7 vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Claude Opus 4.7 leads Ling 3.0 Flash on coding, 67.5 to 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 205.8x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $25.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 21 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Opus 4.7 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash.
Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 205.8x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $2.95).
- Shared results
- 21
- Claude Opus 4.7 only
- 82
- Ling 3.0 Flash only
- 3
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 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
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 scores 67.5 against 29.6.
4 and 2 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 40.7 against 20.1.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 38.6 against 19.3.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 90.2% against 84.8%.
Same board, both measured
Math
AIME
No call
Only Claude Opus 4.7 has a AIME result, 96.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 leads, 89.9% against 82.0%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Claude Opus 4.7 $0.018, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Ling 3.0 Flash
Claude Opus 4.7 $2.95, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Opus 4.7 67.5 from 4 benchmarks, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 29.4 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): Claude Opus 4.7 71.0% against Ling 3.0 Flash 2.9%, 68.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Opus 4.7 $25.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 205.8x apart.
- Context window
- Claude Opus 4.7 takes 1M 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 | Claude Opus 4.7 | Bars | Ling 3.0 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 6 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 4 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 3 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 5 | 0 | ||
| General | 2 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 21 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1558 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 73.6 | 50.6 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 85.1% | 84.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 82.0% | 65.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 71.0% | 2.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 43.9% | 0.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 68.5% | 50.2% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 54.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierCode | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| GSO-Bench | 44.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| WeirdML | 76.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MirrorCode | 31.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1519 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1516 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1560 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1554 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | 1577 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 40.7 | 20.1 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.8 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 38.6 | 19.3 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 51.5% | 30.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 23.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 38.5% | 0.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 63.7% | 25.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 88.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 49.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 18.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| PostTrainBench | 28.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Vending-Bench 2 | $10,937 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Search | 1230 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 90.2% | 84.8% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 91.4% | 85.5% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 42.3% | 23.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 90.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI | 93.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 75.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| SimpleBench | 61.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Chess puzzles | 41.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | 28.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| EBR-bench | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1506 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1521 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | 1336 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | 1337 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 80.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 96.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 97.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 70.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 31.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ProofBench | 54.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1509 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 89.9% | 82.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 85.3% | 79.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 68.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 66.1% | 61.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 75.3% | 70.7% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 70.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 54.9% | 32.3% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 51.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1508 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1504 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | 45.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | 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 index20
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 56.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 83.0% | 80.9% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Vals Multimodal Index | 67.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| IFBench | 58.6% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.7% | 73.0% | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| DTBench | 94.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMCA | 52.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Furniture assembly | 33.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| ExploitBench | 26.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1490 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1498 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1486 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision | 1317 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1496 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1480 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1531 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1464 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1503 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1494 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1489 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1505 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1492 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1474 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | 1322 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | 1371 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | 1327 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | 1309 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: recognizing things | 1278 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | 1326 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| LMArena Document | 1495 | Not measured | Only Claude Opus 4.7 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.7 | 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 | Anthropic Claude Opus 4.7 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | inclusionAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | April 16, 2026 | July 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $5.00 | $0.0405 |
| Output $/Mtok | $25.00 | $0.1215 |
| Coding index | 67.5 | 29.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.95 | $0.05 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?
Pick Claude Opus 4.7 for coding: it scores 67.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash. Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 205.8x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $25.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $2.95).
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Claude Opus 4.7 costs $2.95 and Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Claude Opus 4.7, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.7 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?
21 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Claude Opus 4.7's coding index rests on 4 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.