Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Ling-flash-2.0 | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.14 | $0.14 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0.57 | $0.55 |
Verdict. Hy3 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Hy3 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Hy3 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Ling-flash-2.0 is strongest on Intelligence Index (9.6). Hy3 leads on Coding Index (58.8), Intelligence Index (42.2).
Speed. On throughput, Ling-flash-2.0 generates tokens at 89 tok/s versus 67 tok/s — about 24% faster. On time-to-first-token, Ling-flash-2.0 responds in 2300ms vs 2880ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.
Provider. InclusionAI and Tencent sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: InclusionAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Tencent often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Ling-flash-2.0 costs $12.75 ($153/year); Hy3 costs $12.45 ($149/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Ling-flash-2.0 ≈ $1.84/run, Hy3 ≈ $1.80/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Ling-flash-2.0 ≈ $85/run, Hy3 ≈ $83/run. Hy3 becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Hy3 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.24/M tokens vs $0.25/M for Ling-flash-2.0.
Hy3 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Ling-flash-2.0. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Ling-flash-2.0 generates tokens faster at 89 tok/s vs 67 tok/s. Ling-flash-2.0 also has lower time-to-first-token (2.30s vs 2.88s).
Choose based on your priorities: Hy3 for lower cost, Hy3 for stronger benchmark performance, and Ling-flash-2.0 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.