Kimi K2.7 Code vs Ling-3.0-flash
Which is better for the money: Kimi K2.7 Code by Kimi or Ling-3.0-flash by InclusionAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-07.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Kimi K2.7 Code scores 5.2 points higher (43.0 vs 37.8) but costs 7.5× as much to run the benchmark ($545 vs $72.7; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Kimi K2.7 Code when you need intelligence above 37.8, and Ling-3.0-flash when 37.8 is enough.
| Metric | Kimi K2.7 Code | Ling-3.0-flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.0 | 37.8 | −12.1% Ling-3.0-flash is 12.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $544.58 | $72.70 | −86.7% Ling-3.0-flash is 86.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 66.82s | 9.48s | −85.8% Ling-3.0-flash is 85.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.95 / $4.00 | $0.07 / $0.22 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Ling-3.0-flash vs Kimi K2.7 Code: 12.1% less intelligence, 86.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 85.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Kimi K2.7 Code is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
- Ling-3.0-flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 (Reasoning, Max Effort) scores 51.80 for $72.0.
Kimi K2.7 CodeLing-3.0-flashToday's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k2-7-code/ling-3-0-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k2-7-code/ling-3-0-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill