Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 vs Qwen3.5-2B
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 scores 54.8 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B leads on reach and risk. 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 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 37
Watch for
574 GB in FP8 with no smaller build from inclusionAI, so no single machine under 690 GB of GPU memory runs it
Best for Builders who want a cheap local helper or fine-tuning base for narrow tasks and image reading on a laptop, small GPU or CPU
Ahead on
- Reach, 80 against 60
- Risk, 55 against 45
Watch for
No quantised build from Alibaba, and only one inference provider
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 Qwen3.5-2B +20
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 80
Memory earns the full 30, since LM Studio's Q4_K_M GGUF with its vision projector is 1.94 GB, about 2.3 GB with the fifth added (Ollama's Q4_K_M build was 1.9 GB on 21 October). Alibaba publishes no quantised 2B, so builds scores 0. Runtimes reach the 25 cap, with llama.cpp b11963 and Ollama through the build it pins re-read today. Apache 2.0 with nothing added gives terms 15 and the ungated download 10. Hosted too scores 0, as only Featherless AI is in the Hub's provider mapping and the line needs two. 30+25+0+15+10+0 = 80.
Documentation and upkeep Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +19
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 37
The card covers six of the seven items, missing only a cut-off (17), because it states the intended uses and warns about thinking loops. Training data is a general description without a cut-off (5). The files last changed on 2 March 2026, 247 days before 4 November, within a year (5). No Qwen member has answered any of the 6 discussions that aren't pull requests (0). Qwen3-1.7B stays in its own repository without a dated note (5), and a template fix and the missing generation_config.json wait unanswered (5). 17+5+5+0+5+5 = 37.
Risk Qwen3.5-2B +10
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.
Qwen3.5-2B 55
Safetensors only with no remote code gives file safety its 25, and files in the Qwen organisation the publisher's GitHub links to, each with a hash on the Hub, give provenance 15. The Apache 2.0 licence carries none of the deductions, so licence risk keeps 15. Safety evaluation, agent guidance and a security programme score 0, since the card has no safety results or agent cautions and no reporting route was found. The Qwen3.5 blog and Alibaba's security response centre couldn't be read, so those are scored as absent and left open. 25+15+0+0+15+0 = 55.
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Qwen3.5-2B | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 35%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Reach | 25%25 | 60 | 80 | Qwen3.5-2B +20 |
| Risk | 20%20 | 45 | 55 | Qwen3.5-2B +10 |
| Agent interface | 10%10 | 60 | 60 | even |
| Documentation and upkeep | 10%10 | 56 | 37 | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 +19 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | 0 | 0 | |
| Total | C 54.8/100 | D 50.5/100 |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Ling-3.1-flash-1019 | Qwen3.5-2B |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Open-weight model | Open-weight model |
| Vendor | inclusionAI (Ant Group) | Alibaba (Qwen team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | None | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | no | no |
| Last release | 2026-11-04 | 2026-03-02 |
| Terms last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Privacy policy last updated | no document linked | no document linked |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (4) |
Verdicts
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.
Qwen3.5-2B
A small vision-language model for prototypes, fine-tuning and narrow local steps such as tool calls, tagging or reading an image. It runs in about 2 GB at 4 bits in six runtimes under plain Apache 2.0. Keep thinking off, since the card warns it loops. The card has no safety results, and Qwen has answered none of its discussions.
Before you call either
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
Qwen3.5-2B
- Smallest start is
ollama run qwen3.5:2b-q4_K_M(1.9 GB); plainqwen3.5:2bpulls the 2.7 GB Q8_0 build - Full precision
vllm serve Qwen/Qwen3.5-2B --port 8000 --max-model-len 262144 --enable-auto-tool-choice --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder - Thinking is off by default; if you turn it on with
"chat_template_kwargs": {"enable_thinking": true}, stream and cut off runaway output, since the card warns of thinking loops, and add--reasoning-parser qwen3in vLLM or SGLang to split the reasoning out - There's no generation_config.json, so pass the card's sampling yourself, for example
temperature=1.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=20, presence_penalty=2.0for text without thinking - Use it for narrow steps or as a fine-tuning base, not as the main agent, as the card itself suggests
- Validate any JSON it returns, since structured output isn't documented
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Ling-3.1-flash-1019 or Qwen3.5-2B?
Ling-3.1-flash-1019 scores 54.8 (C) on agent readiness against Qwen3.5-2B's 50.5 (D), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Qwen3.5-2B leads on reach and risk.
Other comparisons with Ling-3.1-flash-1019 or Qwen3.5-2B
- Agents-A1-4B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Agents-A1-4B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apertus v1.5 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Apodex-1.1-mini vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Arete-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Arete-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- BigBang-v1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- BigBang-v1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Carbon-X vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Carbon-X vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Cosmos-Reason2-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Darwin-36B-Opus vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V3.2 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- DiffusionGemma 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 12B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 26B A4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 31B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E2B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Gemma 4 E4B IT vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.5-Air vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-4.7-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- GLM-5.3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-120b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- gpt-oss-20b vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- gpt-oss-20b vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 30B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Granite 4.2 8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy-Memory-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Hy3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Hy3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Inkling-Small vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling-Small vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Inkling vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Inkling vs Qwen3.5-2B
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- InternVL3.5-GPT-OSS-20B-A4B-Preview vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kimi K3 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kimi K3 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kolibri-1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kolibri-1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Kronos vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Kronos vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna M.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna M.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna S 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Laguna XS 2.1 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LBS-27B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LBS-27B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM2.5-2.6B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-1.7B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-1.7B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Audio-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-Omni-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- LFM3-VL-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Ling-3.1-flash-1019
- Ling-3.0-tiny vs Qwen3.5-2B
- 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 Qwen3.5-397B-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
- MiMo-V2.6 Distill Qwen 9B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-o 4.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 1B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniCPM5-2B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.5 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M2.7 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Mistral Large 4 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nanbeige4.3-33B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Bolt E4B 4GB vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano 4B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- occamy-1.0 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Olmo 3 7B Think vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-122B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-397B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Ornith-1.5-9B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen-AgentWorld-35B-A3B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3-30B-A3B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-0.8B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-122B-A10B vs Qwen3.5-2B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-397B-A17B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-4B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.5-9B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.6-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Coder-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-Omni-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-30B-A3B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-32B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Qwopus3.8-27B-Flash-V2
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Recursive Flint
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Ripple-65B Preview
- Qwen3.5-2B vs SmolLM3-3B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Spark-X2.6-4B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-27B
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Swift 1.5 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
- Qwen3.5-2B vs ThinkingCap (Qwen3.8 27B)
- Qwen3.5-2B vs Baidu Unlimited-OCR-2
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/ling-3-1-flash-1019-vs-qwen3-5-2b.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/ling-3-1-flash-1019.json·/api/v1/tools/qwen3-5-2b.json - From a terminal
anchor compare ling-3-1-flash-1019 qwen3-5-2b(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "ling-3-1-flash-1019", "b": "qwen3-5-2b"}at/mcp, no key