Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 vs Ling 3.0 Flash

GPT-5.4 leads Ling 3.0 Flash on coding, 64.4 to 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 123.5x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 17 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.4OpenAI
Coding
64.4
Overall
69.6
Output $/M
$15.00
16
Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
29.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.1215
1
vs boards won of 17 shared

GPT-5.4 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.4 for coding: it scores 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash.

Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 123.5x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $15.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $1.02).

Shared results
17
GPT-5.4 only
101
Ling 3.0 Flash only
7
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
GPT-5.4 64.4 from 3 benchmarks, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 26.1 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.4 67.4% against Ling 3.0 Flash 2.9%, 64.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.4 $15.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 123.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 takes 1.05M tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash 262K.

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
CategoryGPT-5.4BarsLing 3.0 FlashTies
Coding60
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Knowledge50
General11
All shared boards161
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
LMArena WebDev1463Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
AA Coding Index71.150.6GPT-5.4
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.1%84.0%GPT-5.4
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)78.2%65.2%GPT-5.4
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)67.4%2.9%GPT-5.4
Code migration (Vals AI)35.0%0.0%GPT-5.4
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured50.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)51.7%27.9%GPT-5.4
SciCodeNot measured42.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)57.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-Bench81.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
GSO-Bench31.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
WeirdML77.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MirrorCode15.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
ALE-Bench1607.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: coding1497Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1491Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1453Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1478Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1436Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA40.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
SWE Atlas: Refactoring44.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
SWE Atlas: Test Writing44.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index39.020.1GPT-5.4
Epoch Capabilities Index157.3Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured19.3Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1059Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1017Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1087Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1033Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1135Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 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
τ²-Bench Telecom87.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
APEX-Agents52.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
METR time horizons74.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
DeepResearch Bench35.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
PostTrainBench19.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Vending-Bench 2$6,144Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MCP Atlas70.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond91.7%84.8%GPT-5.4
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)87.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)92.0%85.5%GPT-5.4
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)43.7%23.7%GPT-5.4
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)93.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGI93.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGI-274.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Chess puzzles48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Mystery game puzzles37.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
EBR-bench25.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1485Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: expert1507Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1479Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1327Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1336Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AIME96.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
OTIS Mock AIME97.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 378.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tier 449.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
ProofBench56.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: math1488Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1497Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MathArena37.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro87.5%82.0%GPT-5.4
LegalBench (Vals AI)86.0%79.7%GPT-5.4
CaseLaw (Vals AI)63.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)65.3%61.9%GPT-5.4
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.0%70.7%GPT-5.4
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.3%32.3%GPT-5.4
SimpleQA Verified45.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: science1479Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1458Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1486Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1475Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
PRBench Finance45.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
PRBench Legal44.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1198Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: UI components1213Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: game dev1194Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: data viz1196Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: 3D1066Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1179Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: SVG1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1188Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)43.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.5%80.9%Ling 3.0 Flash
IFBench73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.0%73.0%GPT-5.4
DTBench94.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMCA52.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
CL-bench27.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Furniture assembly37.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
CL-bench Life21.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text1469Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1469Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1439Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision1303Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: English1467Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1465Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1519Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: German1473Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1485Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1449Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: French1493Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1452Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1480Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1472Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1482Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1474Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1458Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1438Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: English1301Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1354Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1312Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1284Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1251Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1283Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Document1471Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
EQ-Bench 41272Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
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

GPT-5.4$0.010Fits 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

GPT-5.4$0.170Fits 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

GPT-5.4$0.650Fits in one request
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 GPT-5.4 and Ling 3.0 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash
MakerOpenAIinclusionAI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 5, 2026July 23, 2026
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.0405
Output $/Mtok$15.00$0.1215
Coding index64.429.6
Independent measurements behind it32
Cost per solved task$1.02$0.05
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?

Pick GPT-5.4 for coding: it scores 64.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash. Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 123.5x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $15.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $1.02).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.4 costs $1.02 and Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5.4, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.4 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?

17 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-5.4's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Ling 3.0 Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-4-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash" title="GPT-5.4 vs Ling 3.0 Flash, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-4-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.4 vs Ling 3.0 Flash</a></p>