Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3.8 27B

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

I

Ling 3.0 Flash VL

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

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen (Alibaba)
$0.42 / $3.00
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
Compare different models
I
Q
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 11.8× cheaper than Qwen3.8 27B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Qwen3.8 27B scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (33.7 vs 24.6). Qwen3.8 27B has the larger context window (1M vs 262K).
Ling 3.0 Flash VLQwen3.8 27B
Input price / 1M$0.06$0.42
Output price / 1M$0.18$3.00
Blended price (3:1)$0.09$1.06
Cached input / 1M$0.012$0.085
Context window262K1M
Max output33K131K
Intelligence index24.633.7
Coding index5768.1
Providers16
Best provider uptime (30m)100.0%
Vision inputYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Released2026-09-102026-08-14
Retirement

Cost calculator

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or Qwen3.8 27B?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 11.8× cheaper than Qwen3.8 27B on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Qwen3.8 27B: which has a bigger context window?

Ling 3.0 Flash VL: 262,144 tokens. Qwen3.8 27B: 1,000,000 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Ling 3.0 Flash VL ≈ $210.00, Qwen3.8 27B ≈ $2,340.

More comparisons