Ling 3.0 Flash Sante vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante

inclusionAI

$0.042 / $0.12

Input / Output · per 1M tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Super VL

NVIDIA

$0.15 / $0.47

Input / Output · per 1M tokens

Compare different models

Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash Sante is 3.7× cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has the larger context window (1M vs 262K).

	Ling 3.0 Flash Sante	Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Input price / 1M	$0.042	$0.15
Output price / 1M	$0.12	$0.47
Blended price (3:1)	$0.0623	$0.23
Cached input / 1M	$0.0084	$0.02
Context window	262K	1M
Max output	33K	944K
Intelligence index	—	13.6
Coding index	—	—
Providers	—	10
Best provider uptime (30m)	—	100.0%
Vision input	No	Yes
Reasoning	Yes	Yes
Tool calling	Yes	Yes
Released	2026-09-04	2026-10-15
Retirement	—	—

Cost calculator

Input tokens / requestOutput tokens / requestRequests / day

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash Sante or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL?

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante is 3.7× cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Super VL on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL: which has a bigger context window?

Ling 3.0 Flash Sante: 262,144 tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL: 1,048,576 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Ling 3.0 Flash Sante ≈ $145.60, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL ≈ $535.00.

More comparisons