Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash

GPT-5 leads Ling 3.0 Flash on coding, 38.8 to 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 82.3x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 15 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5OpenAI
Coding
38.8
Overall
51.5
Output $/M
$10.00
12
Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
29.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.1215
3
vs boards won of 15 shared

GPT-5 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick

Pick GPT-5 for coding: it scores 38.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash.

Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 82.3x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $0.39).

Shared results
15
GPT-5 only
98
Ling 3.0 Flash only
9
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 38.8 from 3 benchmarks, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 8.9 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
MedCode (Vals AI): GPT-5 49.6% against Ling 3.0 Flash 32.3%, 17.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5 $10.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 82.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5 takes 400K 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-5BarsLing 3.0 FlashTies
Coding31
Intelligence10
Reasoning21
Knowledge41
General20
All shared boards123
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index31
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Aider polyglot88.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SWE-bench Verified74.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena WebDev1418Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AA Coding Index37.850.6Ling 3.0 Flash
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.9%84.0%GPT-5
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.0%65.2%GPT-5
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)20.1%2.9%GPT-5
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured50.2%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured27.9%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)84.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SciCodeNot measured42.0%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)37.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Terminal-Bench49.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GSO-Bench6.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
WeirdML60.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ALE-Bench807.6Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: coding1436Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1420Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1427Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index23.020.1GPT-5
Epoch Capabilities Index150.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured19.3Only Ling 3.0 Flash 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 Telecom86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
METR time horizons69.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Remote Labor Index1.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GDPval34.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
BALROG32.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
DeepResearch Bench49.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
BrowseComp-Plus80.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond85.6%84.8%GPT-5
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)81.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)85.4%85.5%Ling 3.0 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.5%23.7%GPT-5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)86.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ARC-AGI65.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ARC-AGI-29.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SimpleBench56.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Chess puzzles36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Mystery game puzzles23.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
EBR-bench12.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
VPCT66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1415Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: expert1419Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1419Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1252Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1278Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark72.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
AIME93.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)96.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)92.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AA Math Index94.3Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)94.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
OTIS Mock AIME91.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 355.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 422.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
ProofBench18.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MATH level 598.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: math1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro86.5%82.0%GPT-5
LegalBench (Vals AI)86.0%79.7%GPT-5
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.1%61.9%Ling 3.0 Flash
TaxEval (Vals AI)73.4%70.7%GPT-5
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)96.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.6%32.3%GPT-5
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
SimpleQA Verified50.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
GeoBench81.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: science1416Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1413Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1400Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite56.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites1184Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: UI components1177Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: game dev1185Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: data viz1221Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: 3D1055Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1167Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: SVG1188Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
General benchmarks for GPT-5 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 3.0 FlashLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.7%Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)43.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.7%80.9%GPT-5
IFBench73.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)78.2%73.0%GPT-5
DTBench90.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMCA40.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Fiction.LiveBench97.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text1406Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1388Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1365Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: English1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1397Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1422Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: German1416Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1360Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: French1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1399Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1431Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1426Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1399Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1384Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1379Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: English1231Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1267Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1246Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1219Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1212Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1263Not measuredOnly GPT-5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1210Not measuredOnly GPT-5 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 and Ling 3.0 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5Ling 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$0.0063Fits 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$0.092Fits 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$0.350Fits 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 and Ling 3.0 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash
MakerOpenAIinclusionAI
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 7, 2025July 23, 2026
Context window400K262K
Input $/Mtok$1.25$0.0405
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.1215
Coding index38.829.6
Independent measurements behind it32
Cost per solved task$0.39$0.05
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?

Pick GPT-5 for coding: it scores 38.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 29.6 for Ling 3.0 Flash. Pick Ling 3.0 Flash for output tokens 82.3x cheaper ($0.1215 vs $10.00 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.05 against $0.39).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5 costs $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 and $0.1215. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5 costs $0.39 and Ling 3.0 Flash $0.05.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5 or Ling 3.0 Flash?

GPT-5, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?

15 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5'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-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash" title="GPT-5 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-vs-inclusionai-ling-3-0-flash">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5 vs Ling 3.0 Flash</a></p>