Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Solar Pro 3
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads Solar Pro 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 24.6 to 7.8, and Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 3.3x less per output token ($0.18 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.
Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Solar Pro 3: 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 3.3x cheaper ($0.18 vs $0.60 per million).
- Shared results
- 7
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL only
- 0
- Solar Pro 3 only
- 3
- 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.
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 7.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL leads, 28.7 against 1.4.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 131K tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.0001, Solar Pro 3 $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL not benchmarked, Solar Pro 3 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 46.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Ling 3.0 Flash VL 78.3% against Solar Pro 3 32.3%, 46.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL $0.18 against Solar Pro 3 $0.60 per million output tokens, 3.3x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 131K tokens.
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 | Solar Pro 3 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 2 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 2 | 0 | ||
| General | 1 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 7 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 57.0 | 16.2 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| SciCode | 44.2% | 25.5% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 7.6% | Only Solar Pro 3 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 24.6 | 7.8 | 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 | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 28.7 | 1.4 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 86.3% | Only Solar Pro 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 86.2% | 72.4% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.0% | 10.3% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | 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 | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 71.2% | Only Solar Pro 3 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 78.3% | 32.3% | Ling 3.0 Flash VL |
| Neither model has a result on the other 46 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | Solar Pro 3 | 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 | Upstage Solar Pro 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Upstage |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | September 10, 2026 | January 27, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.18 | $0.60 |
| 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 Solar Pro 3 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 3.3x cheaper ($0.18 vs $0.60 per million).
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Solar Pro 3?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.18 per million output tokens; Solar Pro 3 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Solar Pro 3?
Neither: both take 131K tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Solar Pro 3 comparison based on?
7 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 Solar Pro 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.