Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL

Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.6 to 14.8, and Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 5.6x less per output token ($0.18 vs $1.0142 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

DeepSeek V3.1 TerminusDeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.0142
0
Ling 3.0 Flash VLinclusionAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.18
7
vs boards won of 7 shared

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or Ling 3.0 Flash VL: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for a larger context window (164K against 131K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Shared results
7
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus only
38
Ling 3.0 Flash VL only
0
Like-for-like categories
5 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.

At a glance

Coding index
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 21.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Agentic Index: DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus 6.8 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL 28.7, 21.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus $1.0142 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 per million output tokens, 5.6x apart.
Context window
DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus takes 164K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash VL 131K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusBarsLing 3.0 Flash VLTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
General01
All shared boards07
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Coding Index43.557.0Ling 3.0 Flash VL
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)79.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
SciCode38.0%44.2%Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)31.8%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
ALE-Bench745.2Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: coding1425Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1426Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Intelligence Index14.824.6Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Agentic Index6.828.7Ling 3.0 Flash VL
τ²-Bench Telecom37.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.2%86.2%Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)16.4%22.0%Ling 3.0 Flash VL
LMArena Text: hard prompts1426Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1432Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark57.4%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Math Index89.7Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)89.7%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: math1402Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)85.1%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: science1451Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1468Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1457Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1414Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
Design Arena: websites1187Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: UI components1180Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: game dev1131Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: data viz1168Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: 3D1141Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: all code categories1175Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Design Arena: SVG1065Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
IFBench57.0%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)69.3%78.3%Ling 3.0 Flash VL
DTBench81.3%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMCA28.6%Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text1419Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1404Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1403Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: English1429Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: non-English1408Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: Russian1435Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: Polish1427Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1411Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1422Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1409Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1391Not measuredOnly DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusLing 3.0 Flash VLLeader
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

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.0008Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash VL$0.0001Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.018Fits in one request
Ling 3.0 Flash VL$0.0035Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus$0.071Exceeds the context window
Ling 3.0 Flash VL$0.014Exceeds the context window

Ling 3.0 Flash VL 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 DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
SpecificationDeepSeek V3.1 TerminusinclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash VL
MakerDeepSeekinclusionAI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2025September 10, 2026
Context window164K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.3063$0.06
Output $/Mtok$1.0142$0.18
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus better than Ling 3.0 Flash VL for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus for a larger context window (164K against 131K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index or SciCode, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus costs $0.3063 per million input tokens and $1.0142 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs $0.06 and $0.18. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?

DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus, with 164K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. DeepSeek V3.1 Terminus's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Ling 3.0 Flash VL's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next