Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs o3 Mini High
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads o3 Mini High on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.6 to 11.0, and Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 24.4x less per output token ($0.18 vs $4.40 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.0 Flash VL or o3 Mini High: 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 24.4x cheaper ($0.18 vs $4.40 per million).
- Shared results
- 3
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL only
- 4
- o3 Mini High only
- 0
- 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 11.0.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads, 28.7 against 0.9.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
o3 Mini High
o3 Mini High takes 200K 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, o3 Mini High $0.0033 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked, o3 Mini High not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 40.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Coding Index: Ling 3.0 Flash VL 57.0 against o3 Mini High 16.3, 40.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 against o3 Mini High $4.40 per million output tokens, 24.4x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL takes 131K tokens, o3 Mini High 200K.
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 | o3 Mini High | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 1 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 3 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 57.0 | 16.3 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| SciCode | 44.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 24.6 | 11.0 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 28.7 | 0.9 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 18 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.3% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash VL 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | o3 Mini High | 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 | OpenAI o3 Mini High |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | OpenAI |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | September 10, 2026 | February 12, 2025 |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $1.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.18 | $4.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL better than o3 Mini High 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 24.4x cheaper ($0.18 vs $4.40 per million).
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or o3 Mini High?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.18 per million output tokens; o3 Mini High costs $1.10 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or o3 Mini High?
o3 Mini High, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs o3 Mini High comparison based on?
3 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 o3 Mini High's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.