Navigate
AI BENCHY
Advertise here

Ling 3.0 Tiny (medium) vs Laguna S 2.1

Laguna S 2.1 leads on average score with 4.5 vs 3.8. Ling 3.0 Tiny (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.000 vs $0.022. Laguna S 2.1 is faster at 11.67s vs 68.74s, with pass rates of 24.2% vs 15.2%.

Last updated at: 2026-08-07

Rank
#244
Total Output Tokens
1,021,580
Response Time (avg)
68.74s
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 5.9x faster than Ling 3.0 Tiny (medium).

Detailed comparison

Metric Ling 3.0 Tiny Ling 3.0 Tiny medium 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 #244 #226
Reliability 9.7 10.0
Consistency 8.9 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 104,078 125,598
Output Tokens 153,908 57,634
Reasoning Tokens 867,672 0
Response Time (avg) 68.74s 11.67s
Response Time (max) 262.20s 200.52s
Response Time (total) 1512.22s 256.80s

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

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

#244 Ling 3.0 Tiny

medium
Invalid SVG
Cost
$0.000
Time
177.4s
Tokens
6,873 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% 0 211.99s 7,948 70,838 206,006
Laguna S 2.1 3.4 9.7 0.0% 0 550ms 7,917 424 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair