Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

I

Ling 3.0 Flash VL

inclusionAI
$0.06 / $0.18
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
VS
Q

Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507

Qwen (Alibaba)
$0.23 / $2.30
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
Compare different models
I
Q
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 8.3× cheaper than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Ling 3.0 Flash VL scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (24.6 vs 12.7). Ling 3.0 Flash VL has the larger context window (262K vs 131K).
Ling 3.0 Flash VLQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507
Input price / 1M$0.06$0.23
Output price / 1M$0.18$2.30
Blended price (3:1)$0.09$0.75
Cached input / 1M$0.012
Context window262K131K
Max output33K118K
Intelligence index24.612.7
Coding index5722.1
Providers
Best provider uptime (30m)
Vision inputYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Released2026-09-102025-07-25
Retirement

Cost calculator

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 8.3× cheaper than Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: which has a bigger context window?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL: 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507: 131,072 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Ling 3.0 Flash VL ≈ $210.00, Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 ≈ $1,610.

More comparisons