Grok Build 0.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Grok Build 0.1 leads Ling 3.0 Flash VL on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.2 to 24.6, and Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 11.1x less per output token ($0.18 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 2 benchmarks have a result for both.
Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash VL: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Grok Build 0.1 for a larger context window (256K against 131K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 2
- Grok Build 0.1 only
- 1
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL only
- 5
- 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
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Grok Build 0.1
Grok Build 0.1 leads, 27.2 against 24.6.
Same board, both measured
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
Grok Build 0.1
Grok Build 0.1 takes 256K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Grok Build 0.1 $0.0020, Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Grok Build 0.1 not benchmarked, Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 5.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Coding Index: Grok Build 0.1 51.5 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL 57.0, 5.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Grok Build 0.1 $2.00 against Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 per million output tokens, 11.1x apart.
- Context window
- Grok Build 0.1 takes 256K tokens, Ling 3.0 Flash VL 131K.
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 VL | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 1 | 1 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 51.5 | 57.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 13.4% | Not measured | Only Grok Build 0.1 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 44.2% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 27.2 | 24.6 | 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 index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 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 VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 14 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 20 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 VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Grok Build 0.1 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 78.3% | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 47 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 VL | 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 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 | SpaceXAI Grok Build 0.1 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | xAI | inclusionAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | May 20, 2026 | September 10, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.06 |
| Output $/Mtok | $2.00 | $0.18 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Grok Build 0.1 better than Ling 3.0 Flash VL for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Grok Build 0.1 for a larger context window (256K against 131K tokens) and work measured by AA Coding Index, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Grok Build 0.1 costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $2.00 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, Grok Build 0.1 or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Grok Build 0.1, with 256K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Grok Build 0.1 vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL comparison based on?
2 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 VL's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.