Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Ling 3.0 Flash costs 12.8x less per output token than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 ($0.1215 vs $1.56 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- 29.6
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.1215
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $1.56
Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15: which to pick
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 for a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Ling 3.0 Flash has results on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI); Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead.
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
No call
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a AA Intelligence Index result, 20.1.
Directional only
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
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1187.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 takes 1M tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash $0.0001, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 $0.0010 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
- Ling 3.0 Flash 29.6 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Ling 3.0 Flash $0.1215 against Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 $1.56 per million output tokens, 12.8x apart.
- Context window
- Ling 3.0 Flash takes 262K tokens, Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 50.6 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 84.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 65.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 2.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 50.2% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SkillsBench (Vals AI) | 27.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| SciCode | 42.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 20.1 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 19.3 | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 30.3% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 0.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | 25.0% | Not measured | 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 measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 84.8% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 85.5% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 23.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 79.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 61.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 70.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 32.3% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1187 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1175 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1105 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1135 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | Not measured | 1118 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1166 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1107 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1094 | Only Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
| Benchmark | Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | 50.7% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 80.9% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 73.0% | Not measured | Only Ling 3.0 Flash measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 45 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 | inclusionAI Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | inclusionAI | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | July 23, 2026 | February 16, 2026 |
| Context window | 262K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.0405 | $0.26 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.1215 | $1.56 |
| Coding index | 29.6 | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 2 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $0.05 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Ling 3.0 Flash better than Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 for coding?
Only Ling 3.0 Flash has a coding score, 29.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 for a larger context window (1M against 262K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?
Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.0405 per million input tokens and $0.1215 per million output tokens; Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 costs $0.26 and $1.56. Cost per solved task is known for Ling 3.0 Flash only.
Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?
Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15, with 1M tokens against 262K.
Has any benchmark tested both Ling 3.0 Flash and Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Ling 3.0 Flash has results on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI); Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-02-15 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.