Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Ling 3.0 Tiny (high) vs Laguna S 2.1

Laguna S 2.1 leads on average score with 4.5 vs 3.8. Ling 3.0 Tiny (high) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.000 vs $0.022. Laguna S 2.1 is faster at 11.67s vs 76.06s, with pass rates of 24.2% vs 15.2%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-07

Rank
#240
Total Output Tokens
1,048,987
Response Time (avg)
76.06s
Total Cost
$0.000
Rank
#226
Total Output Tokens
57,634
Response Time (avg)
11.67s
Total Cost
$0.022
Recommended model Laguna S 2.1

It has the best score here (4.5), while responding about 6.5x faster than Ling 3.0 Tiny (high).

Detailed comparison

Metric Ling 3.0 Tiny Ling 3.0 Tiny high Release: 2026-08-07 Free Available Laguna S 2.1 Laguna S 2.1 none Release: 2026-07-21 Free Available
Score 3.8 4.5
Rank #240 #226
Reliability 10.0 10.0
Consistency 8.8 8.8
Benchmark coverage 22/22 tests · 66/66 attempts 22/22 tests · 66/66 attempts
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 24.2% 15.2%
Flaky tests 3 3
Total Runs 66 66
Cost per result 0.000 1.205
Total Cost $0.000 $0.022
Input Price $0.000 / 1M $0.090 / 1M
Output Price $0.000 / 1M $0.180 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 115,494 125,598
Output Tokens 139,569 57,634
Reasoning Tokens 909,418 0
Response Time (avg) 76.06s 11.67s
Response Time (max) 345.15s 200.52s
Response Time (total) 1673.38s 256.80s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#240 Ling 3.0 Tiny

high
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
169.5s
Tokens
5,252 tok

#226 Laguna S 2.1

none
Cost
$0.001
Time
7.6s
Tokens
1,345 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Ling 3.0 Tiny 2.9 10.0 0.0% 0 177.65s 7,767 59,320 177,922
Laguna S 2.1 3.4 9.7 0.0% 0 550ms 7,917 424 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair