Model Comparison
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
vs. Ring-flash-2.0
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba, InclusionAI
Recommended Pick
In Ring-flash-2.0 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Ring-flash-2.0
100.0 value score
52.6 reasoning / $0.25/1M
Lowest Price
Ring-flash-2.0
$0.14/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Ring-flash-2.0
52.6 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
24.6 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
Ring-flash-2.0 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Ring-flash-2.0 is 2.1x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct.
Reasoning gap
Ring-flash-2.0 leads Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct by 8.1 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct leads Ring-flash-2.0 by 14.0 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Ring-flash-2.0 wins 14 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.
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Ring-flash-2.0
InclusionAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct | Top Pick In Ring-flash-2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.80/1M | $0.57/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.68/1M | $0.25/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | InclusionAI |
| Release Date | Jul 22, 2025 | Sep 19, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 68.4 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 1651ms | — |
| Latency | 1651ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 31.0 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 44.5 | 52.6 |
| Intelligence | 24.8 | 14.0 |
| Coding | 24.6 | 10.6 |
| Math | 39.3 | 83.7 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 61.8% | 72.5% |
| MMLU Pro | 78.8% | 79.3% |
| HLE | 4.4% | 8.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 58.5% | 62.8% |
| MATH 500 | 94.2% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 39.3% | 83.7% |
| AIME (Original) | 47.7% | — |
| SciCode | 35.9% | 16.8% |
| LCR | 42.3% | 21.0% |
| IFBench | 40.5% | 43.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 43.6% | 0.0% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 18.9% | 7.6% |
Key Takeaways
Ring-flash-2.0 offers the best value at $0.14/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Ring-flash-2.0 has the strongest reasoning profile with a 52.6 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct reaches a 24.6 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
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
- Code generation
- Software development
Ring-flash-2.0
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
