Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha vs Ling 3.0 Tiny
Wins 4 of 5 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 15 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha3 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha2 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own21Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha2 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha pulls ahead
- Command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench 2.1+39.3points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+26.2points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+25points ahead
Where Ling 3.0 Tiny pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+57.6points ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+8.4points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 15 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 39.36727.7+39.3
- SciCodeAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 18.742.924.2+18.7
AgentsAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha
- GDPValAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 26.229.43.2+26.2
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingLing 3.0 Tiny by 8.412.420.8+8.4
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 330+3
ReasoningAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha
- Humanity's Last ExamAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 24.333.69.3+24.3
- GPQA DiamondAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 14.287.673.4+14.2
- CritPtAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 10.910.90+10.9
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLing 3.0 Tiny by 57.611.969.5+57.6
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 2533.58.5+25
Long documentsAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha
- AA-LCRAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 15.475.760.3+15.4
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 32.358.826.5+32.3
- AA Agentic IndexAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 22.329.47.1+22.3
- AA IntelligenceAgnes 2.5 Pro Alpha by 15.726.811.1+15.7
- AA-OmniscienceLing 3.0 Tiny by 5.8-25.1-19.4+5.8
Questions people ask
Which is better, Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha or Ling 3.0 Tiny?
Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha wins four of the five areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning and long documents. Ling 3.0 Tiny wins none. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Agnes 2.5 Pro Alpha. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Ling 3.0 Tiny wins none.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 15 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 11 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.