Model Comparison
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
vs. Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · InclusionAI, Anthropic
Recommended Pick
Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
100.0 value score
24.6 reasoning / $0.11/1M
Lowest Price
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
$0.07/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
57.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
57.0 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
Ling-3.0-flash-VL has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Ling-3.0-flash-VL is 57.1x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback).
Reasoning gap
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) leads Ling-3.0-flash-VL by 33.0 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Ling-3.0-flash-VL wins 4 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
InclusionAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Secure AI Chat made in Europe
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick In Ling-3.0-flash-VL | An Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.07/1M | $4.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.22/1M | $20.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.11/1M | $8.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | InclusionAI | Anthropic |
| Release Date | Sep 10, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 143.8 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 1830ms | — |
| Latency | 15740ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 3.1 |
| Reasoning Score | 24.6 | 57.6 |
| Intelligence | 24.6 | 57.6 |
| Coding | 57.0 | — |
Key Takeaways
Ling-3.0-flash-VL offers the best value at $0.07/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 57.6 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Ling-3.0-flash-VL reaches a 57.0 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
Ling-3.0-flash-VL
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
Claude Opus 5.5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Default Fallback)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
