Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R (08-2024) vs Ling 3.0 Flash

Ling 3.0 Flash costs 4.9x less per output token than Command R (08-2024) ($0.1215 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Command R (08-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
29.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.1215
vs $0.60 vs $0.1215 per 1M output tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash is 4.9x cheaper.

Command R (08-2024) or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick

Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command R (08-2024) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R (08-2024) has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and LMArena Text: hard prompts; Ling 3.0 Flash on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead.

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.

At a glance

Coding index
Command R (08-2024) not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Command R (08-2024) $0.60 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 4.9x apart.
Context window
Command R (08-2024) takes 128K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured50.6Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured65.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured50.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured27.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SciCodeNot measured42.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding1187Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1197Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured20.1Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured19.3Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured30.3%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured25.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.8%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.5%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1186Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: expert1173Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1194Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
LMArena Text: math1188Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1198Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
MMLU ProNot measured82.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured61.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured70.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured32.3%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science1252Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1238Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1268Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1215Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17 boards measured
General benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured73.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LMArena Text1229Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1197Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1234Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: English1238Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: non-English1216Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1227Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: German1216Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1166Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1162Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: Russian1227Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1213Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1230Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1241Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1223Not measuredOnly Command R (08-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 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

Command R (08-2024)$0.0004Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0001Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.0093Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0024Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.036Exceeds the context window
Ling 3.0 Flash$0.0093Fits in one request

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.

Specifications of Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash
SpecificationCohere Command R (08-2024)inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash
MakerCohereinclusionAI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 30, 2024July 23, 2026
Context window128K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.0405
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.1215
Coding indexNot benchmarked29.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.05
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command R (08-2024) 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 R (08-2024) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Command R (08-2024) or Ling 3.0 Flash?

Command R (08-2024) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, Command R (08-2024) or Ling 3.0 Flash?

Ling 3.0 Flash, with 262K tokens against 128K.

Has any benchmark tested both Command R (08-2024) and Ling 3.0 Flash?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R (08-2024) has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and LMArena Text: hard prompts; Ling 3.0 Flash on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI). Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next