AI model comparison
Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs DeepSeek V3.2
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
inclusionAI
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Ling 3.0 Flash VL builds on Ling 3.0 Flash (124B total / 5.5B active MoE from InclusionAI), further strengthening its language capabilities while adding native visual perception and advanced visual
- Input / 1M
- $0.02
- Output / 1M
- $0.06
- Context
- 262K
DeepSeek
DeepSeek V3.2
DeepSeek-V3.2 is a large language model designed to harmonize high computational efficiency with strong reasoning and agentic tool-use performance.
- Input / 1M
- $0.26
- Output / 1M
- $0.42
- Context
- 164K
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
10x cheaper for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
24.6 vs 21.5 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
262K vs 164K tokens
Newer release
Ling 3.0 Flash VL
Released September 10, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
DeepSeek V3.221.5Coding index
DeepSeek V3.244.2Agentic index
DeepSeek V3.2Not availablePricing
Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs DeepSeek V3.2 API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.02 | $0.26 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $0.06 | $0.42 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | $0.00 | $0.14 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | Not available |
What it costs in practice
Estimated cost per 1,000 requests at standard rates. Coding and long-document figures also show the cost when the input is already cached.
Chat message
2K in, 500 out
DeepSeek V3.2$0.73Coding task
30K in, 4K out
DeepSeek V3.2$9.45$5.73 cachedLong document summary
150K in, 2K out
DeepSeek V3.2$39.69$21.09 cachedSpecs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 262K tokens | 164K tokens |
| Max output | 33K tokens | 147K tokens |
| Input types | Image, Text, Video | Text |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | Not available | Not available |
| Default reasoning effort | Not available | Not available |
| Release date | September 10, 2026 | December 1, 2025 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Not supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Hy3
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Solar Pro 4
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Solar Mini 4
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs MiMo-V2.5
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Mistral Nemo
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL vs Ling 3.0 Flash
DeepSeek V3.2View full model details- DeepSeek V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Hy3
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Solar Mini 4
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs MiMo-V2.5
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Gemma 4 26B A4B
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Step 3.7 Flash
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Ling 3.0 Flash
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs GPT-5.4 Nano
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs MiniMax M2.7
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs Step 3.5 Flash
- DeepSeek V3.2 vs DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
Our take
Ling 3.0 Flash VL is 10x cheaper for a typical chat. Ling 3.0 Flash VL scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (24.6 vs 21.5). Ling 3.0 Flash VL has the larger context window (262K vs 164K tokens). The right pick depends on your workload, so the quickest way to settle it is to send the same prompt to both and compare.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL or DeepSeek V3.2 cheaper?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Ling 3.0 Flash VL costs $0.02 per 1M input tokens and $0.06 per 1M output tokens, while DeepSeek V3.2 costs $0.26 per 1M input tokens and $0.42 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Ling 3.0 Flash VL or DeepSeek V3.2?
Ling 3.0 Flash VL supports up to 262K tokens of context, compared with 164K for DeepSeek V3.2.
Is Ling 3.0 Flash VL smarter than DeepSeek V3.2?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Ling 3.0 Flash VL scores 24.6 and DeepSeek V3.2 scores 21.5, putting Ling 3.0 Flash VL ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Ling 3.0 Flash VL and DeepSeek V3.2 at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Ling 3.0 Flash VL and DeepSeek V3.2 answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Ling 3.0 Flash VL and DeepSeek V3.2 at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.