Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in every scored category. 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 An agent with a 24 GB GPU or more that wants a dense multimodal cousin with tool calling under a plain licence
Ahead on
- Reach, 95 against 60
- Risk, 70 against 45
- Agent interface, 85 against 60
- Documentation and upkeep, 65 against 56
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
Watch for
No safety evaluation results published
Best for Teams with a multi-GPU server that want an MIT-licensed flagship for long agent runs and coding
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
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 Gemma 4 31B IT +35
Gemma 4 31B IT 95
Memory 25, Google's own QAT Q4_0 GGUF is 17.7 GB, which with a fifth added comes to about 21 GB and fits a 24 GB card even with the vision projector. Runtimes 25, released code in llama.cpp, Ollama's library, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers fills the cap without LM Studio, which only Google's guides name. Builds 15, Google ships a 4-bit GGUF and a 4-bit compressed-tensors build, read as two of the kinds the checklist names. Terms 15, plain Apache 2.0 with nothing added. Download 10, no gate and no account. Hosted 5, Google's Gemini API serves it today.
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.
Risk Gemma 4 31B IT +25
Gemma 4 31B IT 70
File safety 25, safetensors only and no code from the repository runs to load it or build prompts. Provenance 15, the files come from the google organisation that gemma.ai links to, with a SHA-256 for every weight file and a git hash for every file. Safety evaluation 0, Google says violations were minimal but publishes no results. Agent guidance 10, the card says what its safety training covers and asks for content safeguards, and the tool guide says to validate calls, but there is no prompt-injection guidance. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 carries none of the deductions and its link works. Security programme 5, Google's company-wide security.txt and reward programme exist but nothing ties them to Gemma, and no public advisories were 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.
Agent interface Gemma 4 31B IT +25
Gemma 4 31B IT 85
Chat template 20, a Jinja file in the repository. Tool-calling format 25, Google documents the declaration and call syntax and ships a response schema that Transformers parses. Trained tool calling 20, several calls and responses in one turn. Structured output 0, Google documents none and the card doesn't claim it. Reasoning control 10, thinking turns on or off per request and comes back in its own block. Context 10, 262,144 tokens native.
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.
Documentation and upkeep Gemma 4 31B IT +9
Gemma 4 31B IT 65
Model card 20, all seven items are there, with languages given as counts. Training data 10, a general description with a January 2025 cut-off. Last change 10, the files last changed on 20 July, 104 days before 1 November, and Google's reference code for Gemma 4 last changed in a way that runs this model on 6 July, both inside 180 days. Responsiveness 10, Google answered 14 of the last 40 discussions, none since 30 July. Version policy 10, earlier generations are kept in their own repositories with dated releases. File health 5, two template 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 | Gemma 4 31B IT | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 95 | 60 | Gemma 4 31B IT +35 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 70 | 45 | Gemma 4 31B IT +25 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 85 | 60 | Gemma 4 31B IT +25 |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 65 | 56 | Gemma 4 31B IT +9 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | BB 74.1/100 | C 54.8/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Gemma 4 31B IT | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | Google DeepMind | 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 | yes | no |
| Last release | 2026-07-20 | 2026-11-04 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | 3.8/5 (4) | none |
Verdicts
Gemma 4 31B IT
A dense multimodal cousin with documented tool calling, optional thinking and a 256K context, for general agent work and image reading on one 24 GB GPU through Google's 4-bit build. It runs in every major runtime under plain Apache 2.0. The main risk is that Google publishes no safety results and has gone quiet on the repository since July.
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
Gemma 4 31B IT
- On the reference machine run
llama-server -hf google/gemma-4-31B-it-qat-q4_0-gguf --hf-file gemma-4-31B_q4_0-it.gguf --jinja -c 32768, adding gemma-4-31B-it-mmproj.gguf for images - Or
ollama run gemma4:31bfor the 20 GB Q4_K_M build - In vLLM serve with
--enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser gemma4 --reasoning-parser gemma4, as vLLM's recipe does - Thinking is off by default, so pass
enable_thinking: truein chat_template_kwargs to turn it on, and expect the reasoning in the thought channel block - Drop earlier thoughts from the history except on tool-call turns, as the card asks
- Use the card's sampling, temperature 1.0, top_p 0.95, top_k 64
- Validate function names and arguments before running a call, and check JSON output yourself or use the runtime's guided decoding
- The w4a16 build relies on Marlin INT4 kernels that vLLM marks unsupported on AMD, so use the GGUF on the reference machine
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, Gemma 4 31B IT or Ling-3.1-flash-1019?
Gemma 4 31B IT scores 74.1 (BB) on agent readiness against Ling-3.1-flash-1019's 54.8 (C), and leads in every scored category.
Other comparisons with Gemma 4 31B IT or Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Arete-27B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Carbon-X vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Gemma 4 31B IT
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E2B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Gemma 4 E4B IT
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.5-Air
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-4.7-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs GLM-5.3-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-120b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs gpt-oss-20b
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Granite 4.2 30B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Granite 4.2 3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Granite 4.2 8B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy-Memory-30B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Hy3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Inkling
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Inkling-Small
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kimi K3
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kolibri-1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Kronos
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna M.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna S 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Laguna XS 2.1
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LBS-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM2.5-2.6B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-1.7B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Audio-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-Omni-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs LFM3-VL-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.0-tiny
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-o 4.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniCPM5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.5
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M2.7
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Mistral Large 4
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Muse Glimmer 30B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nanbeige4.3-33B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano 4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs occamy-1.0
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Olmo 3 7B Think
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-122B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-397B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ornith-1.5-9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-0.8B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-122B-A10B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Recursive Flint
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs SmolLM3-3B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
- 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/gemma-4-31b-it-vs-ling-3-1-flash-1019.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/gemma-4-31b-it.json·/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json - From a terminal
anchor compare gemma-4-31b-it ling-3-1-flash-1019(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "gemma-4-31b-it", "b": "ling-3-1-flash-1019"}at/mcp, no key