Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Ling 3.0 Flash VL (InclusionAI) and Kimi K2.7 Code (Moonshot AI) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 13 September 2026

As of 13 September 2026, Kimi K2.7 Code holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#52 vs #55); Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 19.4× cheaper per output token ($0.18/1M vs $3.50/1M); Kimi K2.7 Code offers the longer context window (262K vs 131K tokens); and Ling 3.0 Flash VL ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash VL if…

  • API cost matters — $0.18/1M output tokens against $3.50/1M, about 19.4× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.06/1M against $0.71/1M.
  • you want to self-host: Ling 3.0 Flash VL ships open weights while Kimi K2.7 Code is restricted license.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Ling 3.0 Flash VL was listed 10 September 2026, Kimi K2.7 Code 12 June 2026.

Choose Kimi K2.7 Code if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #52 against #55 (59.1 vs 58.0 points).
  • you need the longer context window — 262K tokens against 131K.
  • you want provider choice — 14 listed API providers against 1.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 26.3 against 24.8.
  • AA Terminal-Bench 2.1 is your yardstick — 67.4% against 64.4%.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 35.0% against 22.0%.

Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2.7 Code: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Ling 3.0 Flash VL and Kimi K2.7 Code
FieldLing 3.0 Flash VLInclusionAIKimi K2.7 CodeMoonshot AI
ModelCap Index position#55#52
Index score58.059.1
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.06$0.71
Output price / 1M tokens$0.18$3.50
Context window131K tokens262K tokens
Max output tokens33K236K
API providers listed114
Weight accessOpen weightsRestricted license
Input modalitiesText, Image, VideoText, Image
First listed10 September 202612 June 2026
PublisherInclusionAIMoonshot AI

Evidence: 1 public benchmark observation across 1 board · 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2.7 Code

Public benchmark boards where Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2.7 Code has a published result
BoardLing 3.0 Flash VLKimi K2.7 CodeLeads
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis24.8intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecified26.3intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecifiedKimi K2.7 Code
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis64.4%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Ling-3.0-flash-VL":reasoning=true67.4%terminal-bench:2.1:terminus-2:e2b:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Kimi K2.7 Code":reasoning=trueKimi K2.7 Code
AA τ²-Bench TelecomArtificial Analysis90.1%tau2:telecom:dual-control:pass-at-1:3-repeats:source-model="Kimi K2.7 Code":reasoning=trueOnly one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis22.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Ling-3.0-flash-VL":reasoning=true35.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Kimi K2.7 Code":reasoning=trueKimi K2.7 Code
WildClawBench OpenClawWildClawBench46.9Only one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2.7 Code: common questions

Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL better than Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 13 September 2026: #52 against #55. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL cheaper than Kimi K2.7 Code?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL is cheaper on output tokens: $0.18/1M against $3.50/1M. Input tokens are $0.06/1M for Ling 3.0 Flash VL and $0.71/1M for Kimi K2.7 Code. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.21 for Ling 3.0 Flash VL versus $3.17 for Kimi K2.7 Code. Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs 93.4% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2.7 Code?

Kimi K2.7 Code has the larger context window: 262K tokens against 131K.

Which is better for coding, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Kimi K2.7 Code?

AA Terminal-Bench 2.1: Ling 3.0 Flash VL 64.4%, Kimi K2.7 Code 67.4% — Kimi K2.7 Code leads.

Are Ling 3.0 Flash VL and Kimi K2.7 Code open-weight models?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL: Open weights. Kimi K2.7 Code: Restricted license. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run Ling 3.0 Flash VL and Kimi K2.7 Code?

ModelCap currently lists 1 API provider for Ling 3.0 Flash VL and 14 for Kimi K2.7 Code, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Kimi K2.7 Code comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 13 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further