Model Comparison
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort)
vs. Ling-flash-2.0
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · DeepSeek, InclusionAI
Recommended Pick
De V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) 11 metric wins Strongest on: TTFT, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Ling-flash-2.0
100.0 value score
43.7 reasoning / $0.25/1M
Lowest Price
Ling-flash-2.0
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort)
58.7 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort)
47.5 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Ling-flash-2.0 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Ling-flash-2.0 is 3.1x cheaper on input tokens than V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort).
Speed gap
Ling-flash-2.0 generates about 1.3x as many tokens per second as V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort).
Reasoning gap
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) leads Ling-flash-2.0 by 15.1 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) leads Ling-flash-2.0 by 30.8 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort)
DeepSeek
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Ling-flash-2.0
InclusionAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick De V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) | In Ling-flash-2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.43/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.87/1M | $0.57/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.54/1M | $0.25/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | DeepSeek | InclusionAI |
| Release Date | Apr 24, 2026 | Sep 17, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 60.6 tok/s | 81.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1152ms | 2005ms |
| Latency | 73386ms | 2005ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 61.2 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 58.7 | 43.7 |
| Intelligence | 51.5 | 15.7 |
| Coding | 47.5 | 16.7 |
| Math | — | 65.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 88.8% | 65.7% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 77.7% |
| HLE | 35.9% | 6.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 58.9% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 65.3% |
| SciCode | 50.0% | 28.9% |
| LCR | 66.3% | 15.0% |
| IFBench | 76.5% | 34.4% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 96.2% | 20.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 46.2% | 10.6% |
Key Takeaways
Ling-flash-2.0 offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 58.7 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort) reaches a 47.5 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
V4 Pro (Reasoning, Max Effort)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Ling-flash-2.0
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
