Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2 Thinking
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads Kimi K2 Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.6 to 22.0, and Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 13.9x less per output token ($0.18 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2 Thinking: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Ling 3.0 Flash VL for output tokens 13.9x cheaper ($0.18 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 4
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL only
- 3
- Kimi K2 Thinking only
- 26
- Like-for-like categories
- 3 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
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads, 24.6 against 22.0.
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
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a GPQA Diamond result, 78.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a AIME result, 85.4%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a MMLU Pro result, 81.1%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has a Design Arena: websites result, 1113.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Kimi K2 Thinking
Kimi K2 Thinking takes 262K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.0001, Kimi K2 Thinking $0.0019 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Kimi K2 Thinking has the number, $0.61.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked, Kimi K2 Thinking not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 6.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Ling 3.0 Flash VL 78.3% against Kimi K2 Thinking 72.0%, 6.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 against Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 per million output tokens, 13.9x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL takes 131K tokens, Kimi K2 Thinking 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Bars | Kimi K2 Thinking | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 1 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 1 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 63.4% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Coding Index | 57.0 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.1% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 60.2% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 85.3% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| SciCode | 44.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 31.1% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 35.7% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 42.8% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 597.5 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 24.6 | 22.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 145.8 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 28.7 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 93.0% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| METR time horizons | Not measured | 59.2% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 78.5% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.2% | 83.8% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.0% | 23.8% | Kimi K2 Thinking |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 85.4% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 90.2% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 94.7 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 94.7% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 81.1% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.2% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | Not measured | 65.7% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 60.6% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.7% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 92.6% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 84.8% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1113 | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 68.1% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.3% | 72.0% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| CL-bench | Not measured | 17.6% | Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 43 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Kimi K2 Thinking | 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 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash VL | MoonshotAI Kimi K2 Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Moonshot AI |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | September 10, 2026 | November 6, 2025 |
| Context window | 131K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.60 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.18 | $2.50 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.61 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL better than Kimi K2 Thinking for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.0 Flash VL for output tokens 13.9x cheaper ($0.18 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2 Thinking?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.18 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2 Thinking only.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2 Thinking?
Kimi K2 Thinking, with 262K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2 Thinking comparison based on?
4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Ling 3.0 Flash VL's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Kimi K2 Thinking's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.