Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Flash is 9.2× cheaper than Qwen3 Coder Next on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
| Ling 3.0 Flash | Qwen3 Coder Next | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $0.021 | $0.12 |
| Output price / 1M | $0.063 | $0.80 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $0.0315 | $0.29 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.0042 | $0.07 |
| Context window | 262K | 262K |
| Max output | 33K | 236K |
| Intelligence index | — | 9.2 |
| Coding index | 50.6 | 36.2 |
| Providers | — | — |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | — | — |
| Vision input | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Released | 2026-07-23 | 2026-02-04 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash or Qwen3 Coder Next?
Ling 3.0 Flash is 9.2× cheaper than Qwen3 Coder Next on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3 Coder Next: which has a bigger context window?
Ling 3.0 Flash: 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 Coder Next: 262,144 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Ling 3.0 Flash ≈ $73.50, Qwen3 Coder Next ≈ $640.00.
More comparisons
Ling 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLing 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLing 3.0 Flash vs Command A+Ling 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 Luna ProLing 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 LunaLing 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 Sol ProLing 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 SolLing 3.0 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5Ling 3.0 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedLing 3.0 Flash vs MiMo-V2.6-FlashLing 3.0 Flash vs Grok 4.7Ling 3.0 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLing 3.0 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashXLing 3.0 Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashLing 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 AstraLing 3.0 Flash vs GPT-6 Astra ProQwen3 Coder Next vs GLM 5.3 PrimeQwen3 Coder Next vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeQwen3 Coder Next vs Command A+Qwen3 Coder Next vs GPT-6 Luna ProQwen3 Coder Next vs GPT-6 LunaQwen3 Coder Next vs GPT-6 Sol ProQwen3 Coder Next vs GPT-6 SolQwen3 Coder Next vs Claude Opus 5.5