Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Ling 3.1 Flash leads Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 41.1 to 12.7, and Ling 3.1 Flash costs 15.6x less per output token ($0.225 vs $3.50 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

Ling 3.1 FlashinclusionAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.225
1
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Qwen
Coding
No data
Overall
52.9
Output $/M
$3.50
0
vs boards won of 1 shared

Ling 3.1 Flash or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 15.6x cheaper ($0.225 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 128K tokens).

Shared results
1
Ling 3.1 Flash only
3
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 only
45
Like-for-like categories
1 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Ling 3.1 Flash not benchmarked, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 28.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Intelligence Index: Ling 3.1 Flash 41.1 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 12.7, 28.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Ling 3.1 Flash $0.225 against Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 $3.50 per million output tokens, 15.6x apart.
Context window
Ling 3.1 Flash takes 262K tokens, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 128K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryLing 3.1 FlashBarsQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Ties
Intelligence10
All shared boards10
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.1Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
SciCode54.1%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
WeirdMLNot measured41.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1424Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1431Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Intelligence Index41.112.7Ling 3.1 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$11Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)39.4%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured80.1%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1416Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1463Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1432Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured86.7%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1412Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1435Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured40.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1433Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1456Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1415Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1412Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1052Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured942Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured956Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured950Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured998Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1032Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.0%Not measuredOnly Ling 3.1 Flash measured
DTBenchNot measured80.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMCANot measured29.3%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured82.4%Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1415Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1386Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1384Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1429Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1397Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1481Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1408Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1386Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1375Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1389Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1400Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1390Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1406Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1399Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1388Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1370Only Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
BenchmarkLing 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Leader
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 3.1 Flash$0.0002Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.0022Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.0044Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.033Fits in one request

Ling 3.1 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Ling 3.1 Flash$0.017Fits in one request
Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507$0.125Exceeds the context window

Ling 3.1 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.

Specifications of Ling 3.1 Flash and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
SpecificationinclusionAI Ling 3.1 FlashQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
MakerinclusionAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 2, 2026July 25, 2025
Context window262K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.225$3.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Ling 3.1 Flash better than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Ling 3.1 Flash for output tokens 15.6x cheaper ($0.225 vs $3.50 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 128K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.1 Flash or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.225 per million output tokens; Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 costs $0.45 and $3.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.1 Flash or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Ling 3.1 Flash, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Ling 3.1 Flash vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. Ling 3.1 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next