Ling 3.0 Flash vs Seed 2.0 Mini vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
Seed 2.0 Mini comes out ahead, 78 to 68 and 65 on our weighted score, though Ling 3.0 Flash is 7% cheaper per token.
inclusionAILing 3.0 Flash
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.06 / $0.18
- Context262K
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Mini
78/100- ECI—
- Price$0.03 / $0.297
- Context256K
NVIDIANemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.055 / $0.20
- Context262K
Seed 2.0 Mini is our pick
Seed 2.0 Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (68) and Ling 3.0 Flash (65). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceLing 3.0 FlashLing 3.0 Flash $0.09 · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B $0.091 · Seed 2.0 Mini $0.097 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextLing 3.0 Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BLing 3.0 Flash 262,144 · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B 262,144 · Seed 2.0 Mini 256,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 2.0 MiniLing 3.0 Flash: Text · Seed 2.0 Mini: Text, Images, Video · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B: Text
- Self-hostingLing 3.0 Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BPublishes downloadable weights (MIT)
| Measure | Weight | Ling 3.0 Flash | Seed 2.0 Mini | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 95 | 94 | 95 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 80 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 36 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 78/100 | 68/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Ling 3.0 FlashinclusionAI | Seed 2.0 MiniByteDance Seed | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.06 | $0.03 (best) | $0.055 |
| Output | $0.18 (best) | $0.297 | $0.20 |
| Cached input | — | $0.0059 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.09 (best) | $0.097 | $0.091 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.059 / $0.594 | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 7 providers | Official Volcengine Ark API | Median of 10 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 256,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 32,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenMIT | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | doubao-seed-2-0-mini-260428 | nvidia/nemotron-3.5-lightning-30b-a3b |
| API providers | 9 | 14 | 15 (best) |
| Released | Jul 23, 2026 | Feb 14, 2026 | Aug 11, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | Sep 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Ling 3.0 Flash$0.96
- Seed 2.0 Mini$0.891
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B$0.95
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Ling 3.0 Flash, Seed 2.0 Mini or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?
Seed 2.0 Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 78/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (68) and Ling 3.0 Flash (65). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Flash, Seed 2.0 Mini or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?
Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper at $0.06 input / $0.18 output per million tokens (median across 7 API providers). Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B costs $0.055 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 10 API providers; free on Nvidia); Seed 2.0 Mini costs $0.03 input / $0.297 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.09 per million tokens for Ling 3.0 Flash versus $0.091 for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (1× as much) and $0.097 for Seed 2.0 Mini (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Ling 3.0 Flash has not been scored yet, Seed 2.0 Mini has not been scored yet and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Ling 3.0 Flash, Seed 2.0 Mini and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Ling 3.0 Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 256,000 for Seed 2.0 Mini. Maximum output per response: Ling 3.0 Flash up to 32,768, Seed 2.0 Mini up to 32,000, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Ling 3.0 Flash accepts text; Seed 2.0 Mini accepts text, images and video; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B accepts text. Seed 2.0 Mini handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Ling 3.0 Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Mini is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is the newest, released Aug 11, 2026. Ling 3.0 Flash came out Jul 23, 2026; Seed 2.0 Mini came out Feb 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
