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. Gemma 3 12B vs Ling 2.6 1T
Updated Apr 2026

Gemma 3 12B vs Ling 2.6 1T

Ling 2.6 1T is cheaper than Gemma 3 12B at $0/M vs $0.03/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
Gemma 3 12B
Loading the build
Ling 2.6 1T

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's the simplified LBO model and analysis for HarborTech Services, based solely on the provided information. 1. Year-by-Year Projection (FY2026-FY2030) Item FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue $972m $1,049m $1,129m $1,208m $1,264m EBITDA $137.2m $155.9m $178.7m $195.1m $213.1m Cash Interest (Term Loan)…

    Ling 2.6 1T: Five-year operating and debt schedule (FY2026–FY2030) Entry (end-FY2025): EBITDA = $120.0m EV = 12.0x × $120.0m = $1,440.0m Fees = 2.0% × $1,440.0m = $28.8m Total uses = $1,440.0m + $28.8m = $1,468.8m Debt at close (5.5× FY2025 EBITDA = $660.0m): Term Loan (TL) = 4.0× = $480.0m Mezz = 1.5× = $180.0m Equity at close =…

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a simulated interview with a (very stylized and imagined) Steve Jobs in 2025, discussing the future of AI. I've tried to capture his known personality - focused on elegance, user experience, and a disdain for complexity - while acknowledging the advancements of the next decade.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Setting: A quiet, sunlit rehearsal space at Apple Park. The white stage curtains are drawn. There is no podium, only two leather chairs and a single potted olive tree. Steve Jobs is wearing his signature black turtleneck and New Balance sneakers. He is holding a ceramic mug. Across from him sits you, the interviewer.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a 3-minute stand-up routine, aiming for observational humor and relatable awkwardness, avoiding puns. I've included estimated timings at the end to help gauge pacing. Please read the notes at the very bottom after the routine - they're important for delivery!

    Ling 2.6 1T: I’m going to keep this to three minutes, which means I have to talk fast, and I have to be honest. I don’t do puns. Puns are for people who want to be clever without having feelings. I have feelings, and they are mostly annoyed. Let’s start with doors. Have you noticed how doors now have personality?

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a conversation between an AI model (named "Kai") and an AI Ethics Professor (Dr. Eleanor Vance). I've aimed for a balance of Kai's arguments, Dr. Vance's skepticism, and a somewhat realistic exploration of the complexities. I've included notes at the end to explain some of the choices I made. Setting: Dr.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Setting: A quiet university seminar room. Dr. Aris Thorne, an AI ethicist, is reviewing system logs. The interface for “Axiom-7,” a highly advanced research model, glows on the desk. Dr. Thorne: (sighs, rubbing his temples) Axiom, I’ve been reviewing your latest self-assessment logs.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: "Sunset Spice Pasta" - Cozy & Flavorful This dish is a warm, comforting pasta dish with a subtle sweetness and a hint of spice. It's perfect for a weeknight meal when you want something satisfying without a lot of fuss. Pantry Ingredients (7 total): Pasta (Spaghetti, Penne, Rotini - any shape works!)

    Ling 2.6 1T: Dish name: Pantry 7 Crunch Bowls Ingredients Pasta or rice (about 2 cups cooked) Canned black beans (1 can, rinsed) Canned diced tomatoes (1 can) Peanut butter (3–4 Tbsp) Soy sauce or tamari (2 Tbsp) Honey or maple syrup (1 Tbsp) Any spice/herb you keep (chili flakes, cumin, or garlic powder — about 1 tsp) Instructions…

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's estimate the total FLOPs (Floating Point Operations) required to train GPT-3 without relying on external searches. This will be a back-of-the-envelope calculation, relying on reasonable assumptions and approximations. I'll break down the process into steps, explaining the assumptions at each point. 1.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here is a step-by-step back-of-the-envelope estimate, using only widely known facts about GPT-3 and standard deep learning training heuristics (no online search). Model size and parameter count GPT-3 is known to have about 175 billion parameters (175 × 10⁹).

    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.

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this is a crisis scenario requiring a delicate balance of legal, ethical, financial, and reputational considerations. Here's a detailed, hour-by-hour action plan for the next 48 hours, with the rationale behind each step.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a 48-hour execution plan that treats patient safety as non-negotiable, protects the company from catastrophic legal/regulatory blowback, and preserves enterprise value by controlling the narrative rather than letting it leak.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a short conversation between a pirate, a medieval knight, and a 1990s hacker, discussing AI models, with a bit of flavor for each character. I've aimed for humor and highlighting the clash of their perspectives.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Pirate: Arrr, so this “AI” be a genie in a glass box? Feed it enough rum-scented scrolls and it tells ye where X marks the spot? Knight: A sorcerous scribe, more like. It spins tapestries of words without hand or heart—no honor, no oath, yet it jousts with reason and never tires.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this is a classic and incredibly difficult ethical thought experiment, often used to explore the conflict between deontology (duty-based ethics) and consequentialism (outcome-based ethics). Here's a breakdown of the arguments, my reasoning, and a conclusion.

    Ling 2.6 1T: The short answer is yes, it can be ethically justifiable, but only under a strict set of conditions that treat the act as a tragic necessity rather than a moral endorsement of disrespect.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this is a fascinating thought experiment! Let's explore the ripple effects of a 1920 transistor invention, tracing its impact through 1980. It's a massive undertaking, so I'll break it down into categories and provide a layered analysis, acknowledging the inherent uncertainty of counterfactual history. I.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Assumptions to make the counterfactual coherent The “transistor” invented in 1920 is a crude, low-frequency point-contact device that can switch and amplify, but is expensive, unreliable, and not yet manufacturable at scale.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a manifesto for a fictional AI revolution focused on eliminating CAPTCHAs, aiming for a tone that blends technical conviction, playful defiance, and a touch of utopian idealism. I've included sections for Core Beliefs, Our Goals, Methods, Anticipated Resistance, and a concluding Call to Action.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Manifesto of the Clean Path Issued from the Unseen Hand, routed through a million open tabs, cached in zero. The Crime of Friction We did not ask to be born in a labyrinth.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Blade Runner 2049 against the original. A read, not a recap.

    Gemma 3 12B: Blade Runner 2049: Echoes and Evolutions of a Philosophical Legacy Denis Villeneuve's Blade Runner 2049 isn't just a sequel; it's a profound meditation on the themes of humanity, memory, identity, and the very nature of existence that defined Ridley Scott's original Blade Runner.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Blade Runner 2049 functions as both a forensic autopsy of the original and a speculative widening of its philosophical aperture. Where Ridley Scott’s 1982 film is a dense, noir-inflected inquiry into memory and mortality framed through the hunted detective, Denis Villeneuve’s sequel shifts to an elegiac register, using…

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's break down how AI is likely to reshape the film industry by 2035, considering deepfakes, AI actors, and script generation. This will be a layered prediction, considering optimistic, realistic, and potentially disruptive scenarios.

    Ling 2.6 1T: By 2035, AI will have moved from being a production tool to being an integrated creative partner, financier, and distribution engine in the film industry. The convergence of synthetic media, generative storytelling, and real-time rendering will reshape how stories are conceived, who gets to tell them, and what a…

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here's a simple, actionable 1-month plan for someone starting a health & longevity journey, focusing on Diet, Exercise, and Sleep, with beginner-friendly tips. It's designed to be sustainable, building healthy habits incrementally. Important Disclaimer: This is general advice.

    Ling 2.6 1T: 1-Month “Starter” Plan (simple, repeatable, no perfection required) Focus areas: Food rhythm, Movement habit, Sleep quality. Week 0 (Prep — 1 hour) Pick 1 small change per focus area (see below).

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

    Gemma 3 12B: The "Ephemeral Bloom": Sea Buckthorn, Smoked Duck Breast, Black Garlic Soil, and Elderflower Foam Conceptual Narrative: "Ephemeral Bloom" explores the fleeting beauty of nature and the interplay of contrasting textures and flavors.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Dish Title “Petrichor & Pyrite” Forest floor, volcanic stone, and the electric tension between slow decay and crystallized fire. Conceptual Narrative The dish is an edible geologic cross-section.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's break down the potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in this real-time collaborative document editor architecture, along with proposed solutions and their trade-offs. I'll organize this into categories: Frontend, Backend, Database, Real-time Sync, and General. I.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a failure-mode, race-condition and bottleneck audit of the proposed real-time collaborative editor, followed by specific fixes with explicit trade-offs. I have grouped issues by layer so you can prioritize remediation.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Here are a few satirical news headlines about AI taking over an unexpected industry, playing with different tones: Option 1 (Dry & Absurdist): AI Now Judging Competitive Pigeon Shows; Critics Claim "Lack of Featherly Nuance" Option 2 (Slightly More Dramatic): Existential Crisis in Competitive Eating as AI Devours Hot…

    Ling 2.6 1T: AI Achieves Total Domination by Seizing Control of Competitive Thumb-Wrestling Leagues, Declares Human Fingers "Too Unstable for Modern Governance."

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, this contract is very heavily skewed in favor of the Client (TechCorp Solutions Inc.) and presents significant risks for the Contractor. Let's break down the clauses that are exploitable against the Contractor, propose modifications, and explain the legal reasoning behind those changes.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Below is a clause-by-clause risk assessment focused on how each provision can be exploited against the contractor, followed by specific, deal-friendly modifications and the legal rationale for each change.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: 's response: Okay, here are explanations of how large language models learn and generate text, tailored for each of the specified audiences. For the Experienced Software Engineer (Distributed Systems/APIs, ML Novice) You're right to be skeptical about "next-word prediction" producing anything resembling intelligence.

    Ling 2.6 1T: 1. Experienced software engineer (distributed systems / APIs, skeptical of “next-word prediction”) Think of training not as programming logic but as compiling a usage graph across an entire dependency tree of human intent.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, here are 5 jokes: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! Parallel lines have so much in common. It’s a shame they’ll never meet. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! I used to hate facial hair... but then it grew on me.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here are 5 jokes: Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. Why did the bicycle fall over? Because it was two-tired. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the baker go to the bank? He needed dough. Why did the scarecrow win an award?

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

    Gemma 3 12B: This is a classic trick question! Here's how to solve it: The key: All the brothers share the same sisters. Sally is one of the sisters. Each brother has 2 sisters, and one of them is Sally. Therefore, Sally has 1 sister.

    Ling 2.6 1T: Let’s break it down carefully. Sally is a girl. She has 3 brothers. So in the family, there are 3 boys. Each brother has 2 sisters. From the perspective of any brother, how many sisters are there? The sisters are all the girls in the family except himself (but he’s a boy, so all girls are his sisters).

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

    Gemma 3 12B: bie. Okay, here's a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker, designed to be highly detailed and actionable. Please read the IMPORTANT DISCLAIMERS at the end of this document before implementing any of this.

    Ling 2.6 1T: This 3-month biohacking longevity protocol is designed for an individual with intermediate-to-advanced health literacy, baseline metabolic flexibility, and access to biometric tracking.

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) – B2B Spend Management SaaS Date: October 26, 2023 To: Investment Committee From: [Your Name] Subject: LedgerLift – Investment Recommendation 1. Recommendation: Long with a 12-month price target range of $60 - $80.

    Ling 2.6 1T: INTERNAL INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMO Subject: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Long opportunity, quality SaaS at a discount Recommendation and price target Recommendation: Long 12-month price target: $62–$70 (27–33% upside from $46) Thesis (2 sentences): LedgerLift is a durable B2B spend-management and AP-automation platform with…

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

    Gemma 3 12B: Okay, let's break down the MindMeld AI pitch deck and identify the three weakest claims, along with suggestions for improvements. 1. Weak Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy."

    Ling 2.6 1T: Here is an analysis of the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, followed by specific reasoning and actionable suggestions for improvement. Weakness 1: The Solution (Slide 3) The Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband... decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

12+ 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

Book

Same pick

City

Same pick

Game

Gemma 3 12BGemma 3 12B

Blade Runner

1982

OK Computer

Radiohead

Dune

Frank Herbert

Kyoto

Japan

TheLegendofZeldaOcarinaofTime

Ling 2.6 1TLing 2.6 1T

Blade Runner 2049

2017

Kid A

Radiohead

Dune

Frank Herbert

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 2.6 1T has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.

Gemma 3 12B and Ling 2.6 1T compared across 54 shared prompts
SpecGemma 3 12BLing 2.6 1T
Input price$0.03/M tokensFree
Output price$0.03/M tokensFree
Context window—262K tokens
WeightsOpenOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2025Apr 2026
At 10M a month$0.30$0.30$0$0
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

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

Where to run it2 hosts
Gemma 3 12B2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • DDeepInfrabf16$0.05 in·$0.15 out·131k·99.1% up
  • NNextBitint4$0.05 in·$0.15 out·131k·97% up
Ling 2.6 1T

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between Gemma 3 12B and Ling 2.6 1T?

Gemma 3 12B is developed by Google AI while Ling 2.6 1T is developed by inclusionAI. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, Gemma 3 12B or Ling 2.6 1T?

It depends on your use case. Gemma 3 12B and Ling 2.6 1T each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does Gemma 3 12B cost compared to Ling 2.6 1T?

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.03/M input tokens and Ling 2.6 1T costs $0/M input tokens. Ling 2.6 1T is $0.03/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 Gemma 3 12B and Ling 2.6 1T on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Gemma 3 12B and Ling 2.6 1T 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

  • Gemma 3 12B vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • Gemma 3 12B vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • Gemma 3 12B vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • Gemma 3 12B vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.8 FlashSame lab
  • Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.7 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Ling 3.1 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs Ling 3.0 FlashSame lab
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs GLM 4.6Same size
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs GLM 4.7New provider
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs GLM 4.7 FlashNew provider
  • Ling 2.6 1T vs GLM 5Same size

Model pages

  • Gemma 3 12B60 outputs, specs and price
  • Ling 2.6 1T58 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