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. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsLing 3.0 Flash VL (free)
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsLing 3.0 Flash VL (free)

Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $0/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) compared across 17 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)
Input price$4/M tokensFree
Output price$20/M tokensFree
Context window1.0M tokens262K tokens
WeightsClosed—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 17 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)576 words
HarborTech Services (HTS) — LBO Underwriting Analysis ENTRY SUMMARY (End FY2025) Item Value FY2025 EBITDA $120.0m Purchase EV (12.0x) $1,440.0m Transaction Fees (2.0%) $28.8m Total Uses $1,468.8m Term Loan (4.0x) $480.0m Mezzanine (1.5x) $180.0m Total Debt $660.0m Equity Check $808.8m YEAR-BY-YEAR MODEL (FY2026–FY2030…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)2,639 words
"MYCELIUM" A Celebration of the Hidden Network Beneath the Forest Floor 🍄 CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE Beneath every forest lies mycelium — the vast, invisible fungal network that connects trees, decomposes matter, and transforms the dead into life.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Claude Opus 5.5300 words
Midnight Silk Noodles Creamy, tangy peanut noodles with a gentle kick, ready faster than takeout. Serves: 2 Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 10 minutes Total time: 15 minutes The 7 Ingredients 8 oz (225 g) spaghetti (or any long noodle) ¼ cup creamy peanut butter 3 tablespoons soy sauce 1 tablespoon honey (or sugar) 1…
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)234 words
✨ Midnight Stardust Pasta ✨ A silky, golden garlic butter pasta that tastes far more magical than its humble ingredients suggest. ⏱ Time Prep: 5 minutes Cook: 12 minutes Total: 17 minutes 🛒 Ingredients (7 Pantry Staples) Spaghetti (8 oz) Butter (4 tbsp) Olive oil (2 tbsp) Garlic (4 cloves, minced) Parmesan cheese (½…
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude Opus 5.52,280 words
Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor The most serious problems cluster in three areas: the sync model (client-clock LWW), cross-server propagation (per-server WebSockets with DB polling), and the CDN/auth layer, which can leak data between users. Issues are grouped by area below.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)1,856 words
Architecture Audit: Real-Time Collaborative Document Editor Critical Issues Found: 25+ REAL-TIME COLLABORATION FAILURES Issue #1 — Last-Write-Wins Silently Destroys User Work Problem: If User A and User B both edit the same paragraph, the change with the later client timestamp wins.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 5.53,435 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual Through 1980 First, a Reality Check on the Premise A transistor "invented" in 1920 would not have changed the world in 1920. The actual 1947 transistor rested on three foundations that did not exist yet: Quantum theory of solids.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)2,673 words
If the Transistor Had Been Invented in 1920: A Counterfactual Trajectory to 1980 Preconditions and plausibility By 1920, Karl Braun's cathode ray tube (1897) and Greenleaf Pickard's silicon crystal detector (1906) had already demonstrated semiconductor properties. Quantum theory was nascent (Planck, Bohr).
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 5.54,420 words
Contractor-Side Review of the Software Consulting Agreement Overall assessment: This agreement is heavily one-sided. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or control to the Contractor, and several provisions interact to create compounding exposure.
Read the full answer
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)1,967 words
Comprehensive Analysis: Exploitative Clauses and Recommended Modifications This agreement is overwhelmingly one-sided. Below is a clause-by-clause breakdown of exploitative provisions, suggested modifications, and the legal reasoning behind each.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Opus 5.5 has the edge: bigger context window, major provider backing.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)
Input
$0.000
Output
$0.000
Where to run it

4 hosts

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) is developed by inclusionAI. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)'s 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 17 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 17 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) costs $0/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) is $4.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Ling 3.0 FlashSame lab
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 2.4T A95B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BNew provider
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 27B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 27BNew provider
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame size
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logoQwen3.8 Max logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) vs Qwen3.8 MaxNew provider

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)18 outputs, specs and price
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