[mle]/DaBench

Clover 35B A3B Preview vs Ling 3.1 Flash

Side A
Model page
Side B
Model page
Overall
30
vs
Overall
45

Ling 3.1 Flash is clearly better. It wins 36 of the 43 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. The time under each score is the average per test case, on the machine it ran on. Clover 35B A3B Preview spends 1.4× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
3035.1s
8.4K, 95% thinking7.9K, 73% thinking
451m 16s
Agents
2036.8s
9.6K, 91% thinking4.5K, 66% thinking
4155.9s
Structured Extraction
4327.5s
7.2K, 97% thinking8.1K, 69% thinking
711m 11s
Coding
101m 5s
12.2K, 100% thinking11.3K, 89% thinking
241m 42s
Grounded Answers
4821.0s
5.4K, 94% thinking6.7K, 74% thinking
5258.9s
Instruction Following
5332.8s
9.2K, 95% thinking11.4K, 77% thinking
761m 55s
Business Logic
1936.1s
9.8K, 99% thinking9.7K, 56% thinking
381m 22s
Security & permissions
4725.6s
5.8K, 92% thinking5.2K, 74% thinking
5456.1s
Diagnosis & investigation
037.0s
7K, 82% thinking3.2K, 72% thinking
042.1s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
252 tok/s (better)
112 tok/s
Machine
Hosted
Hosted
Memory at 32K
—
—
Context
—
256K
Cost per run
Not measured
Not measured
Cost per case
Not measured
Not measured
Time per case
35.1s (better)
1m 16s
Quantization
—
—
Harness
custom
openrouter

The race

No lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Clover 35B A3B PreviewLing 3.1 Flash
0255075100501001503045

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

7 won by Clover 35B A3B Preview36 won by Ling 3.1 Flash110 tied