Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
Apodex-1.1-mini 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 documentation and upkeep. 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 Long-running agent tasks with tools on a 32 GB GPU or Mac, or through Apodex's API, under a plain licence
Ahead on
- Reach, 85 against 60
- Risk, 65 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
Watch for
No safety results, and agent guidance only from the harness
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server that want an MIT-licensed flagship for long agent runs and coding
Ahead on
- Documentation and upkeep, 56 against 38
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.
Reach Apodex-1.1-mini +25
Apodex-1.1-mini 85
Memory 20, Apodex's Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision projector is 22.6 GB and needs about 27.1 GB with the fifth added, so 32 GB, as do its NVFP4 and GPTQ-Int4 builds. Runtimes 20, the Qwen3.5 MoE architecture runs in released vLLM, SGLang, Transformers and llama.cpp, while Ollama's and LM Studio's entries are the base's, not this model's. Builds 15, Apodex publishes FP8, NVFP4, GPTQ-Int4 and GGUF. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, nothing is gated. Hosted 5, Apodex's own API serves it.
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.
Agent interface Apodex-1.1-mini +25
Apodex-1.1-mini 85
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, the card says how tools go in and come back and names the parser for SGLang and vLLM, with a full example. Trained tool calling 20, trained for native function calling with parallel calls. Structured output 0. Reasoning control 10, the template turns thinking off per request and the card says the reasoning comes back in reasoning_content. Context 10, 262,144 tokens.
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.
Risk Apodex-1.1-mini +20
Apodex-1.1-mini 65
File safety 25, safetensors and GGUF only and nothing from the repositories runs. Provenance 15, the files are in the apodex organisation its site links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file and a SHA256SUMS file for the GGUF. Safety evaluation 0, none published. Agent guidance 5, the recommended harness documents approval gates and a sandbox boundary, but nothing on prompt injection or refusals for the model. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 from Qwen3.5-35B-A3B through to this model with no conditions added. Security programme 5, the harness has a disclosure policy with a private address, with no route shown for the weights.
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 Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +18
Apodex-1.1-mini 38
Model card 8, it covers intended use, context and languages but not the architecture, parameters, limitations or a knowledge cut-off. Training data 5, a general description with no cut-off. Last change 15, the GGUF build went up on 10 September 2026, 54 days before 3 November. Responsiveness 0, Apodex answered none of the four discussions, unchanged on 3 November 2026. Version policy 5, 1.0-mini stays in its own repository without a note. File health 5, the files agree, but the card's agent example is broken and reports wait without a reply.
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.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Apodex-1.1-mini | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 85 | 60 | Apodex-1.1-mini +25 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 65 | 45 | Apodex-1.1-mini +20 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Apodex-1.1-mini +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 38 | 56 | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +18 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 61/100 | C 54.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Apodex-1.1-mini | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Apodex AI | 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 | MIT |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-08-25 | 2026-11-04 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 3.3/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Apodex-1.1-mini
An agent cousin fine-tuned from Qwen3.5-35B-A3B for long tasks with files, code and tools, with parallel tool calling and about 3B active parameters. It needs 32 GB for Apodex's GGUF, NVFP4 or GPTQ-Int4 builds or about 86 GB in BF16, and Apodex's API serves it too. The main risks are no safety results and no replies from the publisher.
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
Apodex-1.1-mini
- Serve it with
vllm serve apodex/Apodex-1.1-mini --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --reasoning-parser qwen3, or the same parsers in SGLang, so tool calls and reasoning come back parsed - For llama.cpp,
llama-server -hf apodex/Apodex-1.1-mini-GGUF:Q4_K_M --jinja --reasoning-format deepseek, and the card passes the repository's chat_template.jinja with --chat-template-file - Pass tools through the API's tools parameter rather than in the system prompt, as the card asks
- The card recommends temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, repetition_penalty 1.05 and max_tokens up to 32,768
- Send your own system prompt, or set identity_mode, since the template otherwise adds an Apodex identity block
- The template keeps all earlier reasoning in the context unless
preserve_thinkingis false, which grows long agent sessions - Thinking is on by default, send
chat_template_kwargswithenable_thinkingfalse for short tasks, a switch the card doesn't mention - The card's Python example has a broken line where it runs the tool (available_toolsname), so fix it to
available_tools[name](**args)before running - Validate JSON output yourself, since structured output isn't documented
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, Apodex-1.1-mini or Ling-3.1-flash-1019?
Apodex-1.1-mini 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 documentation and upkeep.
Other comparisons with Apodex-1.1-mini or Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Apodex-1.1-mini
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Arete-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs BigBang-v1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Carbon-X
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Cosmos-Reason2-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Darwin-36B-Opus
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V3.2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 12B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 26B A4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-120b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs gpt-oss-20b
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Hy3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Inkling
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Inkling-Small
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kimi K3
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kolibri-1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Kronos
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna M.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna S 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LBS-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-1.7B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Mistral Large 4
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs occamy-1.0
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Recursive Flint
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs SmolLM3-3B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- 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/apodex-1-1-mini-vs-ling-3-1-flash-1019.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/apodex-1-1-mini.json·/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json - From a terminal
anchor compare apodex-1-1-mini ling-3-1-flash-1019(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "apodex-1-1-mini", "b": "ling-3-1-flash-1019"}at/mcp, no key