GPT-5.5 vs Ling-3.0-flash-Fin
Wins 4 of 5 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
GPT-5.5 is the stronger all-rounder.Ling-3.0-flash-Fin is cheaper.
Scores updated · 16 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.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own30GPT-5.53 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software20GPT-5.52 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20GPT-5.52 of 2 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10GPT-5.51 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents rests on a single test.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Ling-3.0-flash-Fin costs 99% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where GPT-5.5 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+40.1points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+24.5points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+23.2points ahead
Where Ling-3.0-flash-Fin pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+49.5points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingGPT-5.5
- Terminal-Bench 2.1GPT-5.5 by 21.884.362.5+21.8
- SciCodeGPT-5.5 by 13.455.842.4+13.4
AgentsGPT-5.5
- Terminal-Bench 4.0GPT-5.5 by 14.614.60+14.6
- GDPValGPT-5.5 by 12.442.730.3+12.4
- AA ApexAgentsGPT-5.5 by 10.337.727.4+10.3
- τ-Bench V3 · Bankingtie3938.6tie
ReasoningGPT-5.5
- CritPtGPT-5.5 by 24.527.12.6+24.5
- Humanity's Last ExamGPT-5.5 by 23.245.822.6+23.2
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationLing-3.0-flash-Fin by 49.51160.5+49.5
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyGPT-5.5 by 40.15817.9+40.1
Other results5 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.
- AA-OmniscienceGPT-5.5 by 35.120.5-14.6+35.1
- AA IntelligenceGPT-5.5 by 15.838.422.6+15.8
- Finance Agent v2Ling-3.0-flash-Fin by 851.859.8+8
- SpreadsheetBench 2GPT-5.5 by 7.329.121.8+7.3
- Finance Agent v1.1Ling-3.0-flash-Fin by 3.965.369.2+3.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, GPT-5.5 or Ling-3.0-flash-Fin?
GPT-5.5 wins four of the five areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning and long documents. Ling-3.0-flash-Fin wins none, but costs 99% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
GPT-5.5. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Ling-3.0-flash-Fin wins none.
Which is cheaper?
GPT-5.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $30.00 per million output tokens; Ling-3.0-flash-Fin costs $0.07 and $0.22. That makes Ling-3.0-flash-Fin about 99% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 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 5 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.