Command A vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 18 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command A has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Command A has the edge where the benchmark that matters is LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 18
- Command A only
- 42
- Ling 3.0 Flash only
- 6
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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 13.1.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 19.3 against 1.0.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 84.8% against 48.5%.
Same board, both measured
Math
AIME
No call
Only Command A has a AIME result, 13.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash leads, 82.0% against 69.2%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash takes 262K tokens against 256K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Command A $0.0075, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
Ling 3.0 Flash
Command A $2.69, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.
Published attempt cost and pass rate
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command A not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Coding, 33.0 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI): Command A 7.8% against Ling 3.0 Flash 65.2%, 57.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Command A $10.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 82.3x apart.
- Context window
- Command A takes 256K 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 | Command A | Bars | Ling 3.0 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 5 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 3 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 4 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 17 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 27.8 | 50.6 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 35.1% | 84.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 7.8% | 65.2% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| 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) | 17.6% | 50.2% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 28.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| SciCode | 38.5% | 42.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 25.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1330 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1336 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 13.1 | 20.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.0 | 19.3 | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 9.0% | 30.3% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| 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 | 80.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.5% | 84.8% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.1% | 85.5% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 12.0% | 23.7% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1326 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1296 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1335 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 13.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 76.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 85.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| AA Math Index | 13.0 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1300 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1312 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 69.2% | 82.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 79.7% | 79.7% | Command A |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 64.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 46.0% | 61.9% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 61.4% | 70.7% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 80.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 19.7% | 32.3% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 71.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1339 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1348 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1315 | Not measured | Only Command A 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 | Command A | 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 index02
| Benchmark | Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 55.7% | 80.9% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| IFBench | 73.9% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 52.7% | 73.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash |
| DTBench | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMCA | 10.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text | 1331 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1309 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1319 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1344 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1313 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1327 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1342 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1351 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1347 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1314 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1324 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1338 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1328 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1306 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | 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 | Cohere Command A | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | inclusionAI |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | March 13, 2025 | July 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $0.0405 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $0.1215 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 29.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.69 | $0.05 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command A better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command A has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Command A has the edge where the benchmark that matters is LegalBench (Vals AI), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Command A or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Command A costs $2.69 and Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.
Which has the bigger context window, Command A or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Ling 3.0 Flash, with 262K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks is the Command A vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?
18 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Ling 3.0 Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.