Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.05 cheaper per 1M input tokens (72% lower; 3.57x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
NewTernary Bonsai 2 27B vs Ling 3.0 Flash
Pick Ling 3.0 Flash when budget is the priority.
Page updated:
Data confirmed:
Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens
Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output
Budget verdict
Pick Ling 3.0 Flash when budget is the priority.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ling 3.0 Flash is estimated at $0.05 vs $0.33 for Ternary Bonsai 2 27B, saving $0.27 (83.8% lower).
Cost-first pickLing 3.0 Flash
Context-first pickBoth models
Sample savings$0.2783.8%
10x traffic gap$2.73
The reported context window is tied, so cost and provider fit carry more weight. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $2.73. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Ling 3.0 Flash stays cheaper across input-heavy, balanced, and output-heavy sample workloads.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | Ternary Bonsai 2 27B | Ling 3.0 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | Ling 3.0 Flash | $0.62 | $0.14 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | Ling 3.0 Flash | $0.57 | $0.08 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | Ling 3.0 Flash | $2.58 | $0.34 |
Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.44 cheaper per 1M output tokens (87.4% lower; 7.94x difference).
Both models report the same context window at 262.14K tokens.
Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.27 cheaper on the standard workload (83.8% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.
Quick Decision
Ling 3.0 Flash has the lower input price; Ling 3.0 Flash has the lower output price; both models report the same context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Ling 3.0 Flash is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.33 for Ternary Bonsai 2 27B and $0.05 for Ling 3.0 Flash.
Choose Ternary Bonsai 2 27B when its provider, model quality, latency, or availability is more important than the numeric price/context winner.
Choose Ling 3.0 Flash when you care most about lower input-token price, and lower output-token price.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ling 3.0 Flash is estimated at $0.05 vs $0.33 for Ternary Bonsai 2 27B, saving $0.27 (83.8% lower).
- Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.27 cheaper on the standard workload (83.8% lower).
- Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.05 cheaper per 1M input tokens (72% lower; 3.57x difference).
- Ling 3.0 Flash is $0.44 cheaper per 1M output tokens (87.4% lower; 7.94x difference).
- Both models report the same context window at 262.14K tokens.
| Feature | NewTernary Bonsai 2 27B (PrismML) | Ling 3.0 Flash (inclusionAI) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.075 | $0.021 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.5 | $0.063 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.33 | $0.05 |
| Context Window | 262.14K | 262.14K |
| Release Date |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | Ling 3.0 Flash | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Ling 3.0 Flash is estimated at $0.05 vs $0.33 for Ternary Bonsai 2 27B, saving $0.27 (83.8% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | Ling 3.0 Flash | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | Ling 3.0 Flash | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Tie | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) can replace Ling 3.0 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free) can replace Ling 3.0 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) can replace Ling 3.0 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Tiny (free) can replace Ling 3.0 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- GLM 5.3 Flash offers 1.31M context with $0.24 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 offers 1.31M context with $0.08 sample workload cost.
- GLM Flash Latest offers 1.31M context with $0.2 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash Latest offers 1.31M context with $0.08 sample workload cost.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) · Qwen · #1
- GPT-5.6 Luna · OpenAI · #2
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · DeepSeek · #3
- Hy4 preview · Tencent · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsPrismML catalog
Review all tracked PrismML models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open PrismML modelsinclusionAI catalog
Check other inclusionAI models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open inclusionAI modelsBonsai 2 27B is a 27B-parameter reasoning model from PrismML derived from Qwen3.8-27B. It supports coding, mathematics, tool calling, and image understanding with a 262K-token context window. Ternary compression shrinks...
*Ling-3.0-flash* is a *124B-parameter Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model*, with approximately *5.1B parameters activated per token*. The model is designed with *token efficiency and production-scale agentic inference* as key priorities, enabling developers...