Ling-3.0-flash vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Ling-3.0-flash by InclusionAI or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-07.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Ling-3.0-flash
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Ling-3.0-flash: 43.7% less intelligence, 244.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 44.3% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Ling-3.0-flash | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 37.8 | 21.3 | −43.7% Qwen3 Coder Next is 43.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $72.70 | $250.18 | +244.1% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 9.48s | 5.28s | −44.3% Qwen3 Coder Next is 44.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.07 / $0.22 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- 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.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
Ling-3.0-flashQwen3 Coder NextToday'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/ling-3-0-flash/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-0-flash/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill