Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Step 3.5 Flash | Ling 2.6 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.1 | $0.1 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0.3 | $0.3 |
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Both models have similar pricing. Check the detailed breakdown above for input vs output token costs.
Step 3.5 Flash wins 7 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Ling 2.6 Flash. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Step 3.5 Flash generates tokens faster at 193 tok/s vs 0 tok/s. However, Ling 2.6 Flash has lower time-to-first-token (0.00s vs 0.91s).
Choose based on your priorities: both are similarly priced, Step 3.5 Flash for stronger benchmark performance, and Step 3.5 Flash for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.