ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

MiniCPM5-2B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin comes out ahead, 36 to 31 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. OpenBMB

    MiniCPM5-2B

    Released Sep 6, 2026New

    31/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove MiniCPM5-2B
  2. Our pick

    inclusionAI

    Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

    Released Aug 27, 2026

    36/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.075 / $0.22
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Ling 3.0 Flash Fin

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is our pick

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against MiniCPM5-2B (31). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 Flash FinLing 3.0 Flash Fin $0.111 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · MiniCPM5-2B unpriced
  • Longest contextLing 3.0 Flash FinLing 3.0 Flash Fin 262,144 · MiniCPM5-2B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsMiniCPM5-2B: Text · Ling 3.0 Flash Fin: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniCPM5-2BLing 3.0 Flash Fin
Inputs & features60%3535
Context window40%2537
Overall100%31/10036/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

MiniCPM5-2B vs Ling 3.0 Flash Fin specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniCPM5-2BOpenBMBLing 3.0 Flash FininclusionAI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input—$0.075
Output—$0.22
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)—$0.111
Long-context rate—Same rate
Price source—Median of 2 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenapache-2.0OpenMIT
API model ID——
API providers13 (best)
ReleasedSep 6, 2026Aug 27, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • MiniCPM5-2B—
  • Ling 3.0 Flash Fin$1.19
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniCPM5-2B or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against MiniCPM5-2B (31). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, MiniCPM5-2B or Ling 3.0 Flash Fin?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin is cheaper at $0.075 input / $0.22 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.111 per million tokens for Ling 3.0 Flash Fin versus . MiniCPM5-2B has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. MiniCPM5-2B has not been scored yet and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniCPM5-2B and Ling 3.0 Flash Fin yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Ling 3.0 Flash Fin has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for MiniCPM5-2B. Maximum output per response: MiniCPM5-2B up to 131,072, Ling 3.0 Flash Fin up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniCPM5-2B accepts text; Ling 3.0 Flash Fin accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (apache-2.0 and MIT), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

MiniCPM5-2B is the newest, released Sep 6, 2026. Ling 3.0 Flash Fin came out Aug 27, 2026.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons