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. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)vsNemotron 3.5 Lightning
Updated Aug 2026

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)vsNemotron 3.5 Lightning

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) is cheaper than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning at $0/M vs $0.08/M input tokens.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Input priceFree$0.08/M tokens
Output priceFree$0.2/M tokens
Context window262K tokens1.0M tokens
Weights—Open
Free API (OpenRouter)Yes (1 provider)Yes (1 provider)
ReleasedAug 2026Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 20 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Debug This Architecture

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

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)2,560 words
Comprehensive Architecture Analysis: Real-Time Collaborative Document Editor CRITICAL: WebSocket Broadcasting Is Siloed Per-Server Problem: Each server maintains its own WebSocket connections. When User A (on Server 1) types, the change is only broadcast to clients connected to Server 1.
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning1,273 words
This architecture is a classic "Google Docs clone" design. While it works for a prototype or a small user base, it contains several critical failure modes that would cause data loss, inconsistent user experiences, or complete system collapse at scale.
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…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)166 words
Midnight Molten Lava Cake Ingredients: All-purpose flour (4 tbsp) Granulated sugar (4 tbsp) Unsweetened cocoa powder (2 tbsp) Vegetable oil (3 tbsp) Water (2 tbsp) Vanilla extract (¼ tsp) Baking powder (¼ tsp) Instructions: Combine Dry Ingredients: In a standard microwave-safe mug, whisk together the flour, sugar…
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning316 words
Dish Name: The "Lazy" 5-Minute Crispy Pancake Pizza Concept: A quick, savory breakfast or snack that feels like a gourmet pizza but uses pantry staples. It relies on the magic of a simple batter to create a crispy base.
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

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

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)556 words
Entry & Sources & Uses FY2025 EBITDA: $120m Purchase Price (EV): 12.0x × $120m = $1,440m Transaction Fees: 2.0% × $1,440m = $28.8m Total Uses: $1,440m + $28.8m = $1,468.8m Total Leverage: 5.5x × $120m = $660m Term Loan: 4.0x × $120m = $480m (9.0% cash interest, 1.0% mandatory amortization = $4.8m/yr) Mezzanine: 1.5x ×…
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning588 words
Year-by-Year Financial Model (FY2026–FY2030) Assumptions & Calculations Logic: Interest: Calculated on beginning debt balance. Term Loan amortizes 1.0% annually (cash). Mezzanine accrues 2.0% PIK annually. Taxes: 25% of (EBITDA - Cash Interest). Tax shields applied to cash interest only.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)961 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch 🚨 The $180B TAM Claim (Slide 4) Why it's weak: This is the most logically incoherent claim in the entire deck. The pitch states the BCI market is projected to reach $5.3B by 2030 (citing Grand View Research) — and then immediately claims a TAM of $180B.
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning971 words
Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, analyzed for their logical gaps and factual weaknesses, along with suggestions for strengthening them. The "94% Accuracy" Claim (Slide 3) The Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy."
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…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)2,066 words
The 1920 Transistor: A Counterfactual Analysis Through 1980 I. Premise and Plausibility For a transistor to emerge in 1920, we must assume that either the theoretical framework of semiconductor physics was accelerated (quantum mechanics was only being formulated in the mid-1920s), or that empirical discovery—building…
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning1,176 words
This is a fascinating counterfactual scenario. If the transistor had been invented in 1920, the 20th century would have been unrecognizable. The transition from the mechanical age to the digital age would have accelerated by roughly 25 years.
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…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)2,253 words
L'Archipel des Ombres (The Archipelago of Shadows) Michelin-Caliber Multi-Component Dish 7 Components Conceptual Narrative: Memory, Mineral Essence, and the Meeting of Land and Sea CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE This dish is an edible cartography—a map of an imaginary archipelago where volcanic soil meets oceanic tides.
Read the full answer
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning869 words
Dish Name: The Alchemy of the Tundra: A Study in Contrasts Conceptual Narrative: This dish is a meditation on the extremes of the Arctic landscape and the human desire to tame it. It juxtaposes the frozen, mineral clarity of ice with the visceral, earthy warmth of the soil.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)
Input
$0.000
Output
$0.000
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Input
$0.08
Output
$0.20
Where to run it

5 hosts, cheapest first

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
NNovita$0 in·$0 out·262k·100% up
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning4 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
DDarkbloomint4$0.07 in·$0.18 out·262k·99.9% upCCoreWeavebf16$0.07 in·$0.20 out·262k·99.1% upPPhala$0.07 in·$0.20 out·262k·99.8% upDDeepInfrabf16$0.08 in·$0.20 out·262k·99.8% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) is developed by inclusionAI while Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is developed by NVIDIA. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) has a 262K token context window vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 20 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 20 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) costs $0/M input tokens and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.08/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) is $0.08/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 Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoHy3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoGLM 5.3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLing 3.0 Flash Sante (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLing 3.0 Flash VL (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free)Same lab
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoNVIDIA Nemotron 3 Super (free) logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Super (free)Version compare
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logoNemotron 3 Nano Omni (free) logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLaguna S 2.1 (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Laguna S 2.1 (free)Same size
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLaguna XS 2.1 (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Laguna XS 2.1 (free)Same size
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLFM2.5-2.6B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs LFM2.5-2.6BNew provider
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoLing 2.6 1T logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Ling 2.6 1TSame lab

Model pages

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)20 outputs, specs and price
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning58 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