Grok Build 0.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Grok Build 0.1 leads Ling 3.0 Flash on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.2 to 20.1, and Ling 3.0 Flash costs 16.5x less per output token ($0.1215 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash: which to pick
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Grok Build 0.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Grok Build 0.1 for work measured by AA Coding Index or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 3
- Grok Build 0.1 only
- 0
- Ling 3.0 Flash only
- 21
- Like-for-like categories
- 2 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.
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
Grok Build 0.1
Grok Build 0.1 leads, 27.2 against 20.1.
Same board, both measured
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 256K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Grok Build 0.1 $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
- Grok Build 0.1 not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 7.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): Grok Build 0.1 13.4% against Ling 3.0 Flash 2.9%, 10.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Grok Build 0.1 $2.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 per million output tokens, 16.5x apart.
- Context window
- Grok Build 0.1 takes 256K 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.
| Category | Grok Build 0.1 | Bars | Ling 3.0 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 51.5 | 50.6 | Grok Build 0.1 |
| 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) | 13.4% | 2.9% | Grok Build 0.1 |
| 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 | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 27.2 | 20.1 | Grok Build 0.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 14 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
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 | SpaceXAI Grok Build 0.1 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | xAI | inclusionAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | May 20, 2026 | July 23, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.0405 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.1215 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 29.6 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 2 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.05 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Ling 3.0 Flash for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Grok Build 0.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Grok Build 0.1 for work measured by AA Coding Index or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Grok Build 0.1 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $2.00 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, Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash?
Ling 3.0 Flash, with 262K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks is the Grok Build 0.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash comparison based on?
3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Grok Build 0.1's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Ling 3.0 Flash's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.