Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Ling 3.0 Flash (InclusionAI) and Qwen3.8 Flash (Qwen) 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 15 September 2026

As of 15 September 2026, Qwen3.8 Flash holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#16 vs #71); Ling 3.0 Flash is 7.5× cheaper per output token ($0.063/1M vs $0.47/1M); Qwen3.8 Flash offers the longer context window (1M vs 262K tokens); and Ling 3.0 Flash ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose Ling 3.0 Flash if…

  • API cost matters — $0.063/1M output tokens against $0.47/1M, about 7.5× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.021/1M against $0.15/1M.
  • you want to self-host: Ling 3.0 Flash ships open weights while Qwen3.8 Flash is restricted license.
  • you want provider choice — 2 listed API providers against 1.

Choose Qwen3.8 Flash if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #16 against #71 (76.3 vs 52.2 points).
  • you need the longer context window — 1M tokens against 262K.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 39.9 against 20.6.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 38.0% against 23.7%.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3.8 Flash was listed 26 August 2026, Ling 3.0 Flash 23 July 2026.

Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Ling 3.0 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash
FieldLing 3.0 FlashInclusionAIQwen3.8 FlashQwen
ModelCap Index position#71#16
Index score52.276.3
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.021$0.15
Output price / 1M tokens$0.063$0.47
Context window262K tokens1M tokens
Max output tokens33K131K
API providers listed21
Weight accessOpen weightsRestricted license
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video
First listed23 July 202626 August 2026
PublisherInclusionAIQwen

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

Benchmark scores: Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Public benchmark boards where Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3.8 Flash has a published result
BoardLing 3.0 FlashQwen3.8 FlashLeads
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis20.6intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecified39.9intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecifiedQwen3.8 Flash
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis23.7%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Ling 3.0 Flash":reasoning=true38.0%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Qwen3.8-Flash-Next":reasoning=trueQwen3.8 Flash

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 vs Qwen3.8 Flash: common questions

Is Ling 3.0 Flash better than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 15 September 2026: #16 against #71. 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 cheaper than Qwen3.8 Flash?

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper on output tokens: $0.063/1M against $0.47/1M. Input tokens are $0.021/1M for Ling 3.0 Flash and $0.15/1M for Qwen3.8 Flash. 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 $0.07 for Ling 3.0 Flash versus $0.53 for Qwen3.8 Flash. Ling 3.0 Flash costs 86.3% 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 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash has the larger context window: 1M tokens against 262K.

Which is better for coding, Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3.8 Flash?

The two models do not share a coding benchmark board on ModelCap yet, so no head-to-head coding score is published; the ModelCap Index position is the closest overall signal.

Are Ling 3.0 Flash and Qwen3.8 Flash open-weight models?

Ling 3.0 Flash: Open weights. Qwen3.8 Flash: 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 and Qwen3.8 Flash?

ModelCap currently lists 2 API providers for Ling 3.0 Flash and 1 for Qwen3.8 Flash, 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 vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 15 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