Command A vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 48.6× cheaper than Command A on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Ling 3.0 Flash VL scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (24.6 vs 13.1). Ling 3.0 Flash VL has the larger context window (262K vs 256K).
| Command A | Ling 3.0 Flash VL | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $2.50 | $0.06 |
| Output price / 1M | $10.00 | $0.18 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $4.38 | $0.09 |
| Cached input / 1M | — | $0.012 |
| Context window | 256K | 262K |
| Max output | 8K | 33K |
| Intelligence index | 13.1 | 24.6 |
| Coding index | 27.8 | 57 |
| Providers | 1 | — |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | — | — |
| Vision input | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | 2026-09-10 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Command A or Ling 3.0 Flash VL?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 48.6× cheaper than Command A on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
Command A vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL: which has a bigger context window?
Command A: 256,000 tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash VL: 262,144 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Command A ≈ $10,000, Ling 3.0 Flash VL ≈ $210.00.
More comparisons
Command A vs GLM 5.3 PrimeCommand A vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeCommand A vs Command A+Command A vs GPT-6 Luna ProCommand A vs GPT-6 LunaCommand A vs GPT-6 Sol ProCommand A vs GPT-6 SolCommand A vs Claude Opus 5.5Command A vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedCommand A vs MiMo-V2.6-FlashCommand A vs Grok 4.7Command A vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashCommand A vs GLM 5.3 FlashXCommand A vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashCommand A vs GPT-6 AstraCommand A vs GPT-6 Astra ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Command A+Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 Luna ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 LunaLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 Sol ProLing 3.0 Flash VL vs GPT-6 SolLing 3.0 Flash VL vs Claude Opus 5.5