Gemma 2 27B vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 3.6x less per output token than Gemma 2 27B ($0.18 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.65
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.18
Gemma 2 27B 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. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL has a AA Intelligence Index result, 24.6.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL has a AA Agentic Index result, 28.7.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL takes 131K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Gemma 2 27B $0.0010, Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemma 2 27B 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
- Gemma 2 27B $0.65 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 per million output tokens, 3.6x apart.
- Context window
- Gemma 2 27B takes 8K 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 Index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 57.0 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 44.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1211 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 24.6 | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.1 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 28.7 | Only 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 index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 86.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 22.0% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 36.5% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1198 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1171 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1206 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 1.4% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MATH level 5 | 27.9% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1212 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1221 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 68.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| MMLU | 75.7% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1198 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1241 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1208 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards measured
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 78.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| DTBench | 48.0% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMCA | 7.1% | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1231 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1206 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1240 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1242 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1217 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1221 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1209 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1175 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1174 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1248 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1228 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1234 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1277 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1224 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1230 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1249 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1212 | Not measured | Only Gemma 2 27B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 28 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 VL costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Google Gemma 2 27B | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | July 13, 2024 | September 10, 2026 |
| Context window | 8K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.65 | $0.06 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.65 | $0.18 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemma 2 27B 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, Gemma 2 27B or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.65 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, Gemma 2 27B or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL, with 131K tokens against 8K.
Has any benchmark tested both Gemma 2 27B and Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Gemma 2 27B has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index; 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 23, 2026.