Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Claude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5 leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 57.6 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 25.0x less per output token ($0.80 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 39 benchmarks have a result for both.

Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
0
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic
Coding
88.8
Overall
87.1
Output $/M
$20.00
39
vs boards won of 39 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or Claude Opus 5.5: which to pick

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Trinity Large Thinking has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 25.0x cheaper ($0.80 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
39
Trinity Large Thinking only
13
Claude Opus 5.5 only
70
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Trinity Large Thinking not benchmarked, Claude Opus 5.5 88.8 from 5 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 48.3 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: Trinity Large Thinking 1238 against Claude Opus 5.5 1807, 81.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Claude Opus 5.5 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryTrinity Large ThinkingBarsClaude Opus 5.5Ties
Coding06
Intelligence01
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design07
General015
All shared boards039
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
LiveBench codingNot measured96.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev12381807Claude Opus 5.5
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured65.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured90.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured66.7%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured18.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured95.1%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured87.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured30.4%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured74.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCode40.6%66.9%Claude Opus 5.5
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
FrontierCodeNot measured54.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierSWENot measured62.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MirrorCodeNot measured77.4%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured2147.4Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13571545Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: software and IT13621538Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: React12311855Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML12401753Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1753Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SciCodeNot measured18.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.857.6Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured168.8Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index25 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1316Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1308Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1368Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench researchNot measured85.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench browserNot measured80.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured85.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured33.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured58.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured9.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured75.9%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured47.1%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vals Science IndexNot measured58.7%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)Not measured91.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Robo-bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured73.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Remote Labor IndexNot measured21.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SpireClimbNot measured3.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$9,235Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena SearchNot measured1213Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
LiveBench reasoningNot measured92.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured49.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%61.4%Claude Opus 5.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured90.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGINot measured98.5%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured93.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured67.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured71.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
EBR-benchNot measured71.4%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421536Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: expert13591549Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561535Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1345Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1362Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured100.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured91.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured95.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
ProofBenchNot measured100.0%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: math13651518Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501516Claude Opus 5.5
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured49.8%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured72.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science13551524Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491509Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: legal and government13451518Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: business and finance13291494Claude Opus 5.5
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured65.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11371335Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: UI components10421385Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: game dev10781461Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: data viz10981397Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: 3D10811476Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: all code categories11171390Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: SVG10161329Claude Opus 5.5
Design Arena: ASCII art1041Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveBench designNot measured86.9%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index015
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
Vals IndexNot measured70.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LiveBench data analysisNot measured80.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured70.6%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured45.8%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured91.4%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
IFBench56.3%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%84.7%Claude Opus 5.5
DTBenchNot measured98.9%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMCANot measured68.2%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured83.3%Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text13401516Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: instruction following13261537Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13081535Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena VisionNot measured1321Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Text: English13561519Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: non-English13251507Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Chinese13711582Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: German1356Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Japanese13121534Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Korean1306Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: French13661493Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Spanish13271508Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Russian13381517Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201501Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: longer queries13181532Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: writing and language13171532Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961515Claude Opus 5.5
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1317Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1326Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1320Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingClaude Opus 5.5Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.0006Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$0.014Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Trinity Large Thinking and Claude Opus 5.5
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingAnthropic Claude Opus 5.5
MakerArcee AIAnthropic
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 1, 2026September 22, 2026
Context window262K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.25$4.00
Output $/Mtok$0.80$20.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked88.8
Independent measurements behind it15
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Claude Opus 5.5 for coding?

Only Claude Opus 5.5 has a coding score, 88.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Trinity Large Thinking has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 25.0x cheaper ($0.80 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Claude Opus 5.5?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Claude Opus 5.5?

Claude Opus 5.5, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Claude Opus 5.5 comparison based on?

39 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Claude Opus 5.5's on 5. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next