Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash costs 24.7x less per output token than Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) ($0.1215 vs $3.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $3.00
- Coding
- 29.6
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.1215
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) 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. Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) has results on LMArena Image Edit; 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.
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
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a AA Intelligence Index result, 20.1.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a AA Agentic Index result, 19.3.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a GPQA Diamond result, 84.8%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a MMLU Pro result, 82.0%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) $0.0020, Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has the number, $0.05.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) 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
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) $3.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 24.7x apart.
- Context window
- Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) takes 131K 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 Index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 50.6 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| 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) | Not measured | 50.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 27.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 42.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 20.1 | Only 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
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 19.3 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| 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 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 85.5% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 23.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 82.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 32.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 50.7% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.9% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 73.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 45 boards here | |||
Image generationDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Image Edit | 1387 | Not measured | Only Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 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 | Google Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | June 18, 2026 | July 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.50 | $0.0405 |
| Output $/Mtok | $3.00 | $0.1215 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 29.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.05 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $3.00 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, Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Ling 3.0 Flash, with 262K tokens against 131K.
Has any benchmark tested both Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) and Ling 3.0 Flash?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Nano Banana 2 (Gemini 3.1 Flash Image) has results on LMArena Image Edit; 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.