Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL

Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 13.9x less per output token than Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) ($0.18 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Google
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.50
Ling 3.0 Flash VLinclusionAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.18
vs $2.50 vs $0.18 per 1M output tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 13.9x cheaper.

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash VL: which to pick

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

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) has results on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos; Ling 3.0 Flash VL on AA Coding Index, SciCode and AA Intelligence Index. 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
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked.
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
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) $2.50 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 per million output tokens, 13.9x apart.
Context window
Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) takes 33K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash VL 131K.

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 Index2 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured57.0Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
SciCodeNot measured44.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured24.6Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured28.7Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured86.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured22.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
General benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured78.3%Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured
Neither model has a result on the other 47 boards here
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Image generation benchmarks for Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
BenchmarkNano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)Ling 3.0 Flash VLLeader
Design Arena: images1176Not measuredOnly Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) measured
Design Arena: graphic design1151Not measuredOnly Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) measured
Design Arena: logos1169Not measuredOnly Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 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

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)$0.0015Fits 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

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)$0.022Exceeds the context window
Ling 3.0 Flash VL$0.0035Fits in one request

Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)$0.085Exceeds 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 Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL
SpecificationGoogle Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image)inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash VL
MakerGoogleinclusionAI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 7, 2025September 10, 2026
Context window33K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.06
Output $/Mtok$2.50$0.18
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) better than Ling 3.0 Flash VL for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?

Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 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, Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL, with 131K tokens against 33K.

Has any benchmark tested both Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash VL?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Nano Banana (Gemini 2.5 Flash Image) has results on Design Arena: images, Design Arena: graphic design and Design Arena: logos; Ling 3.0 Flash VL on AA Coding Index, SciCode and AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next