- Score
- 7.5 (+3.85 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.000 · 0.0% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 29.38s · 59.3% faster
Inclusionai
Release: 2026-08-07
Tested on: 2026-10-01 02:54
inclusionai/ling-3.0-tiny::high
7.9B total (1.3B active)MoEOpen source
Summary
Ling 3.0 Tiny scores 3.7 on AI BENCHY and ranks #393. It has 10.0 reliability, a 23.2% pass rate, $0.000 total cost, and 72.24s average response time.
What makes Ling 3.0 Tiny unique: It stands out most in General Intelligence, where it ranks #1, while Domain specific is its weakest area at #8. Its total benchmark cost is unusually low for its score range. It uses unusually many reasoning tokens, which can help explain its slower or more expensive runs.
Recommended alternatives
We recommend choosing one of these models instead:
- Score
- 5.0 (+1.27 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.000 · 0.0% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 5.36s · 92.6% faster
- Score
- 5.1 (+1.38 points)
- Total Cost (Current Price)
- $0.000 · 0.0% cheaper
- Response Time (avg)
- 7.79s · 89.2% faster
Model facts
Researched on 2026-08-12
- Parameters
- 7.9B total (1.3B active)
- Architecture
- MoE
- Availability
- Open source
- License
- MIT
3.7
Consistency
8.9
10.0
$0.000
Total Output Tokens
939,018
Total Input Tokens
115,314
Input Price
$0.000 / 1M
Output Price
$0.000 / 1M
Cache Read Price
N/A
Cache Write Price
N/A
Cache prices apply to input tokens. Reads reuse cached prompts; writes store them and can cost extra. Output tokens use the output price.
Flaky tests
3
Flaky tests had mixed outcomes across runs (at least one pass and one fail).
Hamster playing table tennis
Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.
#393 Ling 3.0 Tiny
high
No output was saved. The original provider response or failure reason is unavailable.
- Cost
- $0.000
- Time
- 169.5s
- Tokens
- 5,252 tok
Run history
| Tested on | Score | Reliability | Tests Correct | Total Cost | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-01 02:54 Re-test | 3.7 | 10.0 | $0.000 | Current run | |
| 2026-08-07 23:07 First recorded run | 3.8 | 10.0 | $0.000 | Compare |
This run used a different benchmark suite. Keep suite changes in mind when reading historical movement.
Charts
Choose the first model, then click a second model to open a side-by-side page.
Top Models by Score
Score vs Total Cost
Response Time (avg)
Score vs Response Time (avg)
Total Output Tokens
Score vs Total Output Tokens
Quick Compare
Ling 3.0 TinyhighvsNemotron 3.5 LightningnoneFree AvailableLing 3.0 TinyhighvsLing 3.0 TinylowLing 3.0 TinyhighvsGranite 4.1 8bdefaultLing 3.0 TinyhighvsLing 3.0 TinymediumLing 3.0 TinyhighvsLing 3.0 TinydefaultLing 3.0 TinyhighvsGrok 4.20noneLing 3.0 TinyhighvsQwen3.5-9BmediumLing 3.0 TinyhighvsCommand A+mediumLing 3.0 TinyhighvsMercury 2.5noneLing 3.0 TinyhighvsCommand A+high
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Consistency | Tests Correct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Anti-AI Tricks | 6.4 | 7.9 | |
| Coding | 2.9 | 10.0 | |
| Combined | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Data parsing and extraction | 2.8 | 10.0 | |
| Domain specific | 2.9 | 7.2 | |
| General Intelligence | 5.4 | 2.5 | |
| Instructions following | 6.8 | 9.4 | |
| Puzzle Solving | 3.0 | 10.0 | |
| Tool Calling | 10.0 | 10.0 | |
| Trivia | 3.0 | 10.0 |