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)vsQwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Updated Aug 2026

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)vsQwen Plus 0728 (thinking)

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) is cheaper than Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) at $0/M vs $0.4/M input tokens.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) compared across 18 shared prompts
SpecLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Input priceFree$0.4/M tokens
Output priceFree$4/M tokens
Context window262K tokens1.0M tokens
Free API (OpenRouter)Yes (1 provider)No
ReleasedAug 2026Sep 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 18 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)282 words
Crispy Chickpea Pantry Pasta Sweet or savory? Savory with a zesty kick! Total time: 15 minutes Serves: 2 Why it works: Uses pantry staples to create a crunchy, garlicky, umami-packed meal with zero fresh produce needed. The chickpeas get incredibly crispy, and lemon juice (bottled) adds bright freshness.
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…

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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,224 words
Here's a comprehensive analysis of the architecture's failure modes, race conditions, and bottlenecks, with specific solutions and trade-offs: 1. Sync Strategy: Client Timestamps + Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Failure Mode/Race Condition: Clock Skew: Client clocks are unreliable (e.g., user's laptop time off by minutes).
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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,714 words
The Transistor in 1920: A World Transformed by 1980 (A Counterfactual History) The invention of a functional point-contact transistor (likely germanium-based, given 1920s materials science) in 1920 wouldn't immediately spark a revolution.
Read the full answer

Beginner's Longevity Plan

Outline a simple, actionable 1-month plan for someone starting their journey towards better health and longevity. Focus on 3 key areas…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)825 words
This 1-month plan is designed to build foundational habits without causing burnout. The golden rule of beginner health is "add before you subtract"—focus on adding good habits rather than punishing yourself by removing "bad" ones. Here is your simple, actionable 1-month plan focusing on Diet, Exercise, and Sleep.
Read the full answer
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)854 words
Here’s a simple, actionable 1-month plan designed for absolute beginners. It focuses on diet, movement (exercise), and sleep—the 3 most impactful, science-backed pillars for health and longevity. Each week builds gently on the last, prioritizing tiny, sustainable habits over drastic changes.
Read the full answer

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)928 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer Here's the thing: the way you build a distributed system that "does the right thing" isn't by writing rules for every possible scenario — it's by designing the system so that correct behavior emerges from many simple, well-specified interactions.
Read the full answer
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,200 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical Builder) Forget "next word prediction" as a simplistic heuristic—it's the emergent consequence of a massively parallel, distributed state machine solving a high-dimensional compression problem.
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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)644 words
Based on a rigorous analysis of neuroscience, market realities, and startup best practices, here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, with evidence-backed critiques and concrete fixes: Weakest Claim #1: Slide 1 Vision – "Predicts what you want to type *before you think it*" Why it's weak: Violates…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)

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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Input
$0.40
Output
$4.00
Where to run it

1 host

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
NNovita$0 in·$0 out·262k·100% up
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

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 Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) is developed by Qwen. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) has a 262K token context window vs Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)'s 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 18 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 18 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) costs $0/M input tokens and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) costs $0.4/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) is $0.40/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 Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) 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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoHy3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) 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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) 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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) 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
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.8 Max (0902) logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoQwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Qwen3 235B A22B Thinking 2507Cross-provider
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoQwen3 30B A3B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Qwen3 30B A3BSame size
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Same size
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logoQwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) vs Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507Same size

Model pages

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)20 outputs, specs and price
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)37 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