Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Which is better for the money: Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 by InclusionAI or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning by NVIDIA? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 scores 31.0 points higher (43.9 vs 12.9) but costs 17× as much to run the benchmark ($1552 vs $92.8; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 when you need intelligence above 12.9, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning when 12.9 is enough.
| Metric | Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 12.9 | −70.6% Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 70.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,551.81 | $92.76 | −94.0% Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 94.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 9.16s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $0.90 | $0.06 / $0.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Ling 3.1 Flash 1019: 70.6% less intelligence, 94.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Ling 3.1 Flash 1019 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
Ling 3.1 Flash 1019Nemotron 3.5 LightningToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/nemotron-3-5-lightning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019/nemotron-3-5-lightning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill