Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
Apertus v1.5 8B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.1-flash-1019 leads on reach. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.
Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 4969 open weights comparisons
Which one, for what
Best for Agents that want a fully open, multilingual 8B with image and audio input on one 24 GB GPU, and can run a publisher fork of vLLM.
Ahead on
- Risk, 75 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 84 against 56
Watch for
No released runtime supports it, only Swiss AI's forks of vLLM and Transformers
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server that want an MIT-licensed flagship for long agent runs and coding
Ahead on
- Reach, 60 against 40
Watch for
574 GB in FP8 with no smaller build from inclusionAI, so no single machine under 690 GB of GPU memory runs it
Why the edge
Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.
Risk Apertus v1.5 8B +30
Apertus v1.5 8B 75
File safety 25, safetensors only and no code in the repository. Provenance 15, the files are in the swiss-ai organisation the report links, with a checksum on every file. Safety evaluation 10 of 20, published safety benchmarks run with Swiss AI's open harnesses and early access for three outside evaluators, but the manual evaluation is Swiss AI's own and can't be rerun. Agent guidance 10, the report says what the refusals cover, how far jailbreaks get and that capability limits are the main defence, with a personal-data filter to apply, but nothing on prompt injection for deployers. Licence risk 10, 5 off for the use policy. Security programme 5, ETH Zurich's disclosure policy, with no advisories found.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 45
File safety 15, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files (25), less 10 because the card's documented vLLM command passes --trust-remote-code, which runs the repository's configuration_bailing_moe_v3.py, since vLLM 0.33.0 registers no bailing_hybrid config of its own. Provenance 15, files in the inclusionAI organisation that inclusion-ai.org links to, per the Ling-3.0-tiny listing (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results for the model on its card or in the training-content summary. Agent guidance 0, the card has nothing on prompt injection, refusals or safeguards, and inclusionAI publishes no guardrail probe for this model as it did for Ling 3.0. Licence risk 15, MIT with no use policy, no field-of-use limits, no threshold and no clause letting inclusionAI change or revoke it. Security programme 0, www.inclusion-ai.org answers 404 for security.txt on 10 November 2026, and the Ling-3.0-tiny listing found no SECURITY.md or disclosure policy in the inclusionAI .github repository. 15 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 0 = 45.
Documentation and upkeep Apertus v1.5 8B +28
Apertus v1.5 8B 84
Model card 14 of 20, languages and a knowledge cut-off are missing. Training data 20, every dataset is public and listed with versions, licences and counts. Last change 20, the card changed on 14 October 2026, 20 days before 3 November, and Swiss AI added its own evaluation-results files on 26 October and 3 November. Responsiveness 20, Swiss AI answered all three questions, unchanged on 3 November 2026. Version policy 5, earlier models stay in their own repositories without a dated note. File health 5, the gated config couldn't be checked against the card, and the card and the policy disagree on the output filter.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 56
Model card 11, Intended use (complex reasoning, multi-step tasks and agentic workflows), architecture, parameters (560B total, 25B active) and context (1M claimed) are on the card. Training data 15, the training-content summary the card links names the source categories (Common Crawl and other public datasets, commercially licensed data, the Ant Spider crawler, synthetic data), the size band (over 10 trillion text tokens), data collected up to about July 2026 and the filtering, without listing datasets with sizes. Last change 20, the newest commit, on 4 November 2026, edited the card, six days before this check, and the files went up on 27 October. Responsiveness 0, Neither of the 2 discussions that aren't pull requests (both opened on 27 October 2026) has a reply from an inclusionAI member. Version policy 5, the update went into a repository of its own and Ling-3.1-flash and Ling 3.0 stay in theirs. File health 5, the card states a 1M-token context while config.json gives 262,144 with no rope scaling, and its serve commands name the earlier repository as the model path. 11 + 15 + 20 + 0 + 5 + 5 = 56.
Agent interface Apertus v1.5 8B +25
Apertus v1.5 8B 85
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, Swiss AI's report documents how tools are declared and returned and the card names vLLM's apertus parser. Trained tool calling 20, trained on verified tool use with several calls a turn, though parallel calls are weaker on the 8B and tools don't work with thinking on. Structured output 0, not documented. Reasoning control 10, thinking turns on per request and the card says where the reasoning comes back. Context 10, 262,144 tokens trained.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (6,042 characters), which handles tools, the thinking switch and preserved reasoning. Tool-calling format 10, only the template says how tools are declared (JSON in <tools>) and how calls come back (<tool_call>name with <arg_key> and <arg_value> pairs). Trained tool calling 20, the template tells the model it may call one or more functions and loops over every entry in an assistant message's tool_calls, and the card reports gains on agentic benchmarks, AA-Briefcase and AutomationBench-AA among them. Structured output 0, the card doesn't document JSON or JSON Schema output. Reasoning control 0, the card documents turning thinking on or off per request with chat_template_kwargs enable_thinking, and names the ling3 reasoning parser, but doesn't say where the reasoning text comes back. Context 10, 262,144 tokens natively in config.json (max_position_embeddings 262144, rope_scaling null) and per SGLang's cookbook. 20 + 10 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 60.
Reach Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +20
Apertus v1.5 8B 40
Memory 25 of 30, the BF16 files are 18.4 GB, or 22.1 GB with a fifth added, which fits 24 GB. Runtimes 0, no released vLLM (to 0.33.0), SGLang (to 0.5.23), Transformers (to 5.22.1), llama.cpp, Ollama or LM Studio runs version 1.5 yet, only Swiss AI's forks. Builds 0, Swiss AI publishes no quantised build. Terms 10 of 15, Apache 2.0 with an acceptable use policy added at the gate. Download 5, a click-through that needs an account and your contact details. Hosted 0, no inference provider or publisher API was found, and Swiss AI's documentation page names none on 3 November 2026.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 60
Memory 0, inclusionAI's only build is the FP8 release at 573.78 GB, × 1.2 = 688.5 GB, above 256 GB, and no runtime's library has a build. Runtimes 25, Released model code in Transformers 5.22.2 (bailing_hybrid), vLLM 0.33.0 (BailingMoeV3ForCausalLM, with ling3 tool and reasoning parsers), SGLang 0.5.23 (bailing_moe_v3.py, its bailing_hybrid config and MTP module) and llama.cpp b12242 (bailingmoe3), and Ollama, credited through its pinned llama.cpp as on the Ling-3.0-tiny listing: v0.40.16 sets LLAMA_CPP_VERSION to b12177. Builds 10, the release is FP8, the one quantised precision inclusionAI publishes for it. Terms 15, MIT in the card's metadata, with no use policy or other terms added on the card or in the repository. Download 10, the Hub API's model info gives gated false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and no terms to accept. Hosted 0, the Hub API's provider mapping is empty for this repository on 10 November 2026. 0 + 25 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 60.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Apertus v1.5 8B | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 40 | 60 | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 75 | 45 | Apertus v1.5 8B +30 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Apertus v1.5 8B +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 84 | 56 | Apertus v1.5 8B +28 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 54.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Apertus v1.5 8B | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Swiss AI Initiative (EPFL and ETH Zurich) | inclusionAI (Ant Group) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0, with the Apertus Acceptable Use Policy (v1.5, 14 July 2026) accepted at the download gate | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-10-14 | 2026-11-04 |
| Terms last updated | not read yet | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 2.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Apertus v1.5 8B
A fully open 8B cousin, training data included, for multilingual chat and tool calls with images and audio in. It needs about 22 GB in BF16 and Swiss AI's own vLLM or Transformers fork, since no released runtime supports it. The main risks are a gated download with a policy to pass on and tools that fail with thinking on.
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
inclusionAI's newest flagship, a 560B hybrid mixture of experts under plain MIT that vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp run in released versions. It ships only as 574 GB of FP8, so it needs a multi-GPU server. The card overstates the context, documents little about tool calls, and has no safety results.
Before you call either
Apertus v1.5 8B
- Accept the terms on the card and set HF_TOKEN before downloading
- Use Swiss AI's Docker image ghcr.io/swiss-ai/vllm_apertus_1.5_release, since stock vLLM and Transformers don't load Apertus1p5ForConditionalGeneration yet
- Serve with
--chat-template-content-format string --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser apertusfor tools, and leave thinking off when you need tools - For thinking, set
--reasoning-parser apertusand--default-chat-template-kwargs.enable_thinking true, and budget max tokens generously - Audio is resampled to 24 kHz and costs 40 tokens a second, and video must be passed as frames
- Don't cast the loaded model with .half(), the image and audio tokenizers must stay in F32
- If you redistribute the weights, the policy says you must pass it on and get the recipient's express assent
Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Serve it with SGLang 0.5.23 or later on 8 H200 or 4 GB300 GPUs, per the card, and use this repository's name as the model path, not the earlier one the card's command shows
- With vLLM pass
--trust-remote-code,--tool-call-parser ling3and--reasoning-parser ling3 - Set
chat_template_kwargsenable_thinkingfalse for direct answers. Reasoning comes back inreasoning_contentper SGLang's cookbook - Plan on 262,144 tokens of context. The 1M figure needs the YaRN override in SGLang's cookbook
- Use temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95 and top_k 20, per the card
- Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Apertus v1.5 8B or Ling-3.1-flash-1019?
Apertus v1.5 8B scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in 3 of 4 scored categories. Ling-3.1-flash-1019 leads on reach.
Other comparisons with Apertus v1.5 8B or Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apertus v1.5 8B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Arete-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs BigBang-v1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Carbon-X
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs gpt-oss-20b
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Hy3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Inkling
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Inkling-Small
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kimi K3
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kolibri-1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Kronos
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna M.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LBS-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-1.7B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Mistral Large 4
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs occamy-1.0
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Recursive Flint
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kronos vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Mistral Large 4
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs occamy-1.0
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Recursive Flint
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs SmolLM3-3B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/apertus-v1-5-8b-vs-ling-3-1-flash-1019.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/apertus-v1-5-8b.json·/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json - From a terminal
anchor compare apertus-v1-5-8b ling-3-1-flash-1019(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "apertus-v1-5-8b", "b": "ling-3-1-flash-1019"}at/mcp, no key