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 FlashvsQwen3.8 Max
Updated Aug 2026

Ling 3.0 FlashvsQwen3.8 Max

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max at $0.021/M vs $2/M input tokens.

Ling 3.0 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max compared across 15 shared prompts
SpecLing 3.0 FlashQwen3.8 Max
Input price$0.021/M tokens$2/M tokens
Output price$0.063/M tokens$6/M tokens
Context window262K tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsOpenClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJul 2026Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 15 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 Flash248 words
🍝 Honey Fire Twirls A sticky-sweet, spicy, savory pasta that comes together in minutes. 🧺 Ingredients (7 pantry staples) Spaghetti (or penne) — 8 oz Olive oil — 2 tablespoons Garlic, minced — 4 cloves Honey — 3 tablespoons Soy sauce — 2 tablespoons Red pepper flakes — ½ teaspoon (adjust to taste) Parmesan cheese…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max132 words
Dish Name: Golden Hour Peanut Butter Oat Clusters Ingredients (7): 1 cup rolled oats ½ cup peanut butter ⅓ cup honey ½ cup chocolate chips 1 teaspoon vanilla extract ½ teaspoon ground cinnamon ¼ teaspoon salt Instructions: Optional but recommended: Toast the oats in a dry skillet over medium heat for 3–4 minutes…
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Ling 3.0 Flash2,901 words
🧬 THE 90-DAY LONGEVITY OPTIMIZATION BLUEPRINT A Comprehensive Biohacking Protocol for Cellular Renewal, Cognitive Enhancement & Vitality Disclaimer: This protocol is for educational and informational purposes only. Many compounds listed (rapamycin, metformin, etc.) require physician supervision and prescription.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max3,196 words
12-Week Biohacker Longevity & Performance Protocol Goal: improve metabolic health, strength, VO₂max proxies, sleep, HRV/stress resilience, cognitive output, and longevity-related biomarkers over 3 months. Medical disclaimer: This is an aggressive self-experimentation framework, not medical advice.
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 Flash945 words
Three Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch Deck "94% Accuracy" — Slide 3 (Solution) Why It's Weak This is presented as a single, impressive number with zero context, which makes it essentially meaningless — and likely misleading. Several critical questions go unanswered: What is the vocabulary size?
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max1,957 words
The 3 weakest claims are the pre-thought prediction claim, the 94% accuracy / any language / any device claim, and the $180B TAM claim. These are the ones most likely to undermine credibility with investors, technical reviewers, or enterprise buyers because they are either logically inconsistent, under-specified, or…
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 Flash2,291 words
Architecture Analysis: Real-Time Collaborative Document Editor WebSocket & Cross-Server Communication Issue: Siloed WebSocket Servers (Critical) Each API server only broadcasts changes to clients connected to that specific server.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max5,155 words
Below is a comprehensive failure-mode review of the proposed architecture. I will group related issues where the same root cause creates multiple symptoms. The biggest problems are: Client-clock last-write-wins is not safe for collaborative editing.
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…

Ling 3.0 Flash2,036 words
Contract Analysis: Exploitative Clauses & Recommended Modifications Clause-by-Clause Analysis SCOPE — Unilateral Modification Without Compensation The Problem: Client can modify the scope at any time and for any reason without paying Contractor for the additional work.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max4,612 words
This agreement is heavily one-sided in the Client’s favor. Many clauses are not merely aggressive; they create meaningful opportunities for the Client to expand the work, delay or deny payment, capture the Contractor’s pre-existing intellectual property, impose unlimited liability, and restrict the Contractor’s future…
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 Flash2,510 words
🍽️ TERRA NUDA — A Study in Forest Petrichor A Six-Component Dish Exploring the Ephemeral Moment After Rain Falls on a Living Forest 📖 CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE Terra Nuda — Latin for "naked earth" — is inspired by the liminal moment immediately after a summer storm passes through a forest: the air thick with petrichor…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.8 Max2,887 words
First Light Diver Scallop, Bone Marrow, Green Strawberry, and Chamomile A multi-component savory dish designed around contrast: sea sweetness, land richness, unripe-fruit acidity, and floral aromatics.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Ling 3.0 Flash
Ling 3.0 Flash
Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max

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

Ling 3.0 Flash costs 95x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Ling 3.0 Flash
Input
$0.02
95× cheaper
Output
$0.06
95× cheaper
Qwen3.8 Max
Input
$2.00
Output
$6.00

Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper on both: 95× input, 95× output.

Where to run it

3 hosts, cheapest first

Ling 3.0 Flash2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
NNovita$0.02 in·$0.06 out·262k·100% upDDeepInfrabf16$0.06 in·$0.18 out·131k·99.7% up
Qwen3.8 Max1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$2.00 in·$6.00 out·1M·100% 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 is developed by inclusionAI while Qwen3.8 Max is developed by Qwen. Ling 3.0 Flash has a 262K token context window vs Qwen3.8 Max's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 15 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Ling 3.0 Flash and Qwen3.8 Max each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 15 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Ling 3.0 Flash costs $0.021/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 Max costs $2/M input tokens. Ling 3.0 Flash is $1.98/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 and Qwen3.8 Max 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 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoHy3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoGLM 5.3 logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Ling 3.0 Flash logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Fin (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash Sante (free) logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free)Same lab
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen3.8 Max logoQwen3.8 Max (0902) logo
Qwen3.8 Max vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Same lab
Ling 3.0 Flash logoHy4 Preview logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Hy4 PreviewSame size
Ling 3.0 Flash logoInkling logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs InklingSame size
Ling 3.0 Flash logoINTELLECT-3 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs INTELLECT-3New provider
Ling 3.0 Flash logoKimi K2 logo
Ling 3.0 Flash vs Kimi K2Same size

Model pages

Ling 3.0 Flash logo
Ling 3.0 Flash16 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.8 Max logo
Qwen3.8 Max22 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