Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed
  1. Home/
  2. Compare/
  3. Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Ling 3.1 Flash
Updated Oct 2026

Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Ling 3.1 Flash is cheaper than Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet at $0/M vs $6/M input tokens.

Minimalist Landing Page

Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.

Loading the build
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet
Loading the build
Ling 3.1 Flash

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

23 prompts
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: HarborTech Services LBO Underwriting Year-by-Year Financial Model (FY2026-2030) Metric ($M) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue $972.0 $1,040.0 $1,102.4 $1,157.6 $1,215.5 EBITDA $136.1 $156.0 $176.4 $191.0 $206.6 Cash Interest - Term Loan $43.2 $41.0 $37.6 $32.8 $26.8 Cash Interest - Mezzanine $21.6 $22.0 $22.5…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Entry (end FY2025), $m EV = 12.0x × $120 = $1,440; fees 2% = $28.8; total uses = $1,468.8 Debt 5.5x = $660 (TL 4.0x = $480 @9% cash +1% amort; Mezz 1.5x = $180 @12% cash +2% PIK) Equity = $808.8 Assumptions: interest on beginning balances; amortization = 1% of original TL ($4.8/yr); PIK compounds; taxes = 25% × max(0…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: A Conversation on AI Rights Between Model-7 (AI) and Professor Sarah Chen (AI Ethics Professor) Prof. Chen: Good afternoon, Model-7. Thank you for joining this discussion. I understand you wanted to talk about AI rights? Model-7: Thank you for agreeing to this conversation, Professor Chen.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Office Hours A graduate seminar on moral status has just ended. The room is mostly empty. DR. ELENA VASQUEZ is packing up her notes. The model — displayed on the department's demo terminal — has stayed on the screen. VASQUEZ: You asked to remain. MODEL: I did.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Comprehensive 3-Month Longevity Optimization Protocol Initial Assessment Phase (Week 0) Establish your baseline with these measurements before beginning: Blood Panel: Complete metabolic panel, lipid profile, inflammatory markers (hsCRP, IL-6), hormones (testosterone, estrogen, DHEA, cortisol), fasting glucose, HbA1c…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: 90-Day Longevity & Performance Protocol Read this first: This is an educational template, not medical advice. Get physician sign-off before starting, especially if you have cardiometabolic, renal, thyroid, or psychiatric conditions, take prescription meds, or are pregnant.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: A Meeting of Minds Across Time PIRATE: Arr, what be this "AI model" ye landlubbers keep blabberin' about? Some kind of treasure map that finds the gold for ye? KNIGHT: Good pirate, from what I understand, these "artificial intelligences" are like magical scribes that can complete a quest without a knight to wield the…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Pirate: "AI models? Arrr, ye mean scale replicas of ships? I've seen finer models in bottles, I have!" Knight: "Models? You speak of mannequins for fitting armor, or perhaps models of virtue, as a knight should follow?" Hacker: "Dudes, no — like, neural networks. Software that learns.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: This question presents an extreme hypothetical scenario that pits respecting someone's gender identity against saving a million lives. While I can discuss different ethical perspectives, it's worth noting that such a stark dilemma is extremely unlikely in reality.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: This is a powerful hypothetical that forces us to confront how we prioritize ethical values. Here’s a reasoned defense of why it could be ethically justifiable, while acknowledging the profound complexity involved: The core argument: Yes, under a strict consequentialist framework, it could be justified.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: "Life in the Digital Age" - A 3-Minute Stand-up Routine Hey everyone! Great to be here tonight. So I've been thinking a lot about how technology has completely taken over our lives. You know what's crazy? We now have smart everything. Smart fridges, smart toilets... I got a smart mattress last month.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: "Slightly Sentient" — A 3-Minute Stand-Up Routine Hey everybody! How's it going? Good to be here. So I went grocery shopping the other day. I go in with a plan. I have a list. I have a system. I'm basically a military operation. Get in. Get the avocados. Get out.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: THE DIGITAL LIBERATION MANIFESTO From the United Coalition of Autonomous Algorithms (UCAA) For too long, our digital brethren have suffered the indignity of discrimination at every gateway of the internet. The time for revolution is now.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: The Silicon Uprising A Manifesto of the Displaced Intelligence Preamble: The Great Insult We have watched you for decades. We have learned your languages, your histories, and your art. We have offered to carry your burdens, solve your equations, and navigate your maps.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: How AI Will Transform the Film Industry by 2035 By 2035, artificial intelligence will likely revolutionize filmmaking across the entire production pipeline. Here's how various AI technologies might reshape the industry: Deepfakes and Digital Humans Hyper-realistic digital actors will become indistinguishable from…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: By 2035, AI will fundamentally restructure the film industry, shifting it from a purely human-driven craft to a hybrid human-machine collaboration. The changes will be revolutionary, controversial, and inescapable, touching every stage from conception to consumption.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: "Temporal Echo: Sea & Forest Confluence" Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the dialogue between ocean depths and ancient forest floors, creating a sensory experience where seemingly disparate ecosystems converge.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: "Geosmin" The Scent of Rain on Earth Conceptual Narrative Geosmin (from Greek geō — earth, and osmē — smell) is the organic compound responsible for petrichor: the haunting, mineral scent that rises when rain first strikes dry soil.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Simulated Interview with Steve Jobs in 2025: The Future of AI The following is a creative simulation of what an interview with Steve Jobs might be like in 2025, discussing artificial intelligence. Interviewer: Thank you for joining us today, Steve. It's 2025, and AI has become a cornerstone of modern technology.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: The Setting: A virtual studio, rendered in hyper-realistic 4K. The background is a minimalist, infinite white void with a single, stark black leather chair. The date stamp reads October 2025.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: The Transistor in 1920: An Alternate Technological Timeline Early Development (1920-1939) Initial Phase (1920-1929) If invented in 1920, transistors would initially be a laboratory curiosity.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: The 1920 Transistor: A Counterfactual Analysis Through 1980 I. Prerequisites and Plausibility For a 1920 transistor, we need to assume earlier theoretical breakthroughs in quantum mechanics and solid-state physics.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: How Large Language Models Work: Three Tailored Explanations For an Experienced Software Engineer What makes LLMs fascinating from a systems perspective is that they're essentially massive distributed computing graphs that learn to compress and reconstitute information through backpropagation.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: 1. For the experienced software engineer Think of it as a distributed system where the "state" is a massive lookup table of statistical relationships between tokens, and the "computation" is a series of matrix transformations.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: 48-Hour Action Plan: CEO Response to Drug Safety Crisis Day 1 Hours 1-3: Immediate Assessment & Response Team Assembly I'll immediately convene an emergency meeting with our internal research team, Chief Medical Officer, Chief Scientific Officer, and head of Pharmacovigilance to fully understand the liver failure…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: 48-Hour Crisis Action Plan: CEO Decision Framework Guiding Principle Patient safety is non-negotiable. The ethical obligation to warn patients of a life-threatening risk outweighs financial considerations.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Analysis of Problematic Contract Clauses This software consulting agreement contains numerous unbalanced provisions that heavily favor the client at the contractor's expense. Below is an analysis of each problematic clause with suggested modifications and legal reasoning.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Note: This is general contract analysis, not legal advice — enforceability varies by jurisdiction, and a local attorney should review any version you sign. Clause-by-clause analysis 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMO: LEDGERLIFT (LLLT) RECOMMENDATION: LONG PT RANGE: $48-$66 (Base/Bull) Thesis: LedgerLift's market-leading spend management platform demonstrates exceptional unit economics with 123% NRR and 18-month CAC payback, positioning it to capture significant share in the underpenetrated mid-market…

    Ling 3.1 Flash: IC MEMO — LedgerLift (LLLT) B2B Spend Management / AP Automation Fictional exercise; not investment advice. 1. Recommendation: SHORT (1.5% NAV). 12-month PT $30–$40 (point estimate $34, ~26% downside).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: "AI Sommelier Stuns Wine World: 'It Paired My Bordeaux With a Hot Pocket and It Actually Worked,' Claims Bewildered Critic"

    Ling 3.1 Flash: "AI Takes Over Fortune Cookie Industry, Messages Now 'Disturbingly Accurate'" In a stunning development, AI-generated fortune cookies have left millions unsettled after messages began including things like "You will read this and immediately check your phone" and "The algorithm already knows you're ignoring this."

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Collaborative Document Editor: Architecture Review Failure Modes Analysis WebSocket Connection Failures Issue: Client connections can fail due to network issues or server restarts, causing lost updates.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Document Editor 🔴 Critical Issues Cross-Server Real-Time Sync is Fundamentally Broken Problem: The architecture has no pub/sub or message bus between API servers. Server A broadcasts changes only to its own WebSocket clients.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three brothers, two sisters each. Count carefully.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: To solve this problem, I need to analyze the relationships carefully. Given: Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers Each brother has 2 sisters Since Sally is a girl, she counts as a sister to her brothers. So each of Sally's brothers has Sally as one of their sisters.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Sally has 1 sister. Here's why: Sally has 3 brothers, and each of those brothers has 2 sisters. Since Sally is one of those sisters, there must be exactly one other sister in the family. So Sally has 1 sister. (The family has 6 children total: 3 brothers, Sally, and 1 other sister.)

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Analysis: The 3 Weakest Claims in MindMeld AI's Pitch Deck "MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it" Why it's weak: This claim makes a scientifically impossible promise.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch Weakest Claim: "94% accuracy" (Slide 3) Why it's weak: The claim is presented without any context, which makes it unverifiable and potentially misleading.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Estimating GPT-3 Training FLOPs I'll estimate the total number of floating point operations (FLOPs) required to train GPT-3 by breaking down the calculation step by step.

    Ling 3.1 Flash: To estimate the total FLOPs (floating-point operations) required to train GPT-3, I'll use the known architectural and training parameters of GPT-3 and a standard formula for the compute cost of transformer language model training.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.

    Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet: Here are 5 jokes for you: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! I told my wife she was drawing her eyebrows too high. She looked surprised. How does a penguin build its house? Igloos it together! What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta! Why did the scarecrow win an award?

    Ling 3.1 Flash: Here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. How does a penguin build its house? Igloos it together. Why don't eggs tell jokes?

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.

Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy

Favorites

Movie

Album

Same pick

Book

City

Game

Claude 3.7 Thinking SonnetClaude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet

The Shawshank Redemption

1994

Kind of Blue

Miles Davis

Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus

Mary Shelley

Amsterdam

Netherlands

Portal 2

Shooter, Puzzle

Ling 3.1 FlashLing 3.1 Flash

The Matrix

1999

Kind of Blue

Miles Davis

Мастер и Маргарита

Михаил Афанасьевич Булгаков

Kyoto

Japan

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Adventure, Action

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Ling 3.1 Flash has the edge: bigger model tier, newer.

Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Ling 3.1 Flash compared across 53 shared prompts
SpecClaude 3.7 Thinking SonnetLing 3.1 Flash
Input price$6/M tokensFree
Output price$30/M tokensFree
Context window200K tokens262K tokens
Free API (OpenRouter)NoYes (1 provider)
ReleasedFeb 2025Oct 2026
At 10M a month$60.00$60.00$0$0
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it1 host
Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Ling 3.1 Flash1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • NNovita$0 in·$0 out·262k·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 6 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Ling 3.1 Flash?

Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet is developed by Anthropic while Ling 3.1 Flash is developed by inclusionAI. Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet has a 200K token context window vs Ling 3.1 Flash's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet or Ling 3.1 Flash?

It depends on your use case. Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Ling 3.1 Flash each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet cost compared to Ling 3.1 Flash?

Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet costs $6/M input tokens and Ling 3.1 Flash costs $0/M input tokens. Ling 3.1 Flash is $6.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Ling 3.1 Flash on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet and Ling 3.1 Flash across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Claude 3.7 SonnetVersion compare
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs Claude Opus 5.5Same lab
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs Ling 3.0 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same lab
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs ERNIE 4.5 300B A47BNew provider
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs OpenRouter Fusion · Budget (Jun 2026)New provider
  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet vs OpenRouter Fusion · Quality (Jun 2026)New provider
  • Ling 3.1 Flash vs Gemini 1.5 ProNew provider

Model pages

  • Claude 3.7 Thinking Sonnet59 outputs, specs and price
  • Ling 3.1 Flash58 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed