Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 15.5 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 3.1x less per output token ($0.80 vs $2.50 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 42 benchmarks have a result for both.

Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
10
Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
34.3
Output $/M
$2.50
32
vs boards won of 42 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or Gemini 2.5 Flash: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 3.1x cheaper ($0.80 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Shared results
42
Trinity Large Thinking only
10
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
31
Like-for-like categories
8 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, Gemini 2.5 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 58.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Trinity Large Thinking 90.1% against Gemini 2.5 Flash 31.6%, 58.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Gemini 2.5 Flash $2.50 per million output tokens, 3.1x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Gemini 2.5 Flash 1.05M.

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 ThinkingBarsGemini 2.5 FlashTies
Coding12
Intelligence01
Agentic work10
Reasoning14
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design61
General118
All shared boards1032
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured28.7%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured69.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%13.6%Trinity Large Thinking
Terminal-BenchNot measured17.1%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding13571423Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: software and IT13621425Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.815.5Gemini 2.5 Flash
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured142.9Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%31.6%Trinity Large Thinking
BALROGNot measured33.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$549Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured56.2%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
BrowseComp-PlusNot measured39.9%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%79.0%Gemini 2.5 Flash
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%12.1%Trinity Large Thinking
ARC-AGINot measured33.3%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured2.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SimpleBenchNot measured41.2%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421422Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: expert13591426Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561420Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1245Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1244Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured56.8%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured73.3Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured73.3%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: math13651411Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501422Gemini 2.5 Flash
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
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 measured40.4%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.2%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science13551433Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491428Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: legal and government13451430Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: business and finance13291404Gemini 2.5 Flash
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured47.2%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index61
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
Design Arena: websites11371074Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: UI components10451005Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: game dev10791005Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: data viz10981060Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: 3D10821021Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: all code categories11171059Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: SVG10171020Gemini 2.5 Flash
Design Arena: ASCII art1041Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index118
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured44.8%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured83.0%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
IFBench56.3%50.3%Trinity Large Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%65.3%Gemini 2.5 Flash
DTBenchNot measured76.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMCANot measured27.5%Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401417Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: instruction following13261405Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: creative writing13081400Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena VisionNot measured1235Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English13561418Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: non-English13251409Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Chinese13711449Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: German13561417Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Japanese13121396Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Korean13061385Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: French13661432Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Spanish13271422Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Russian13381415Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: Polish13121413Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201408Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: longer queries13181419Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: writing and language13171405Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961393Gemini 2.5 Flash
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1239Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1284Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1237Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1225Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1277Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1252Only Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1241Only Gemini 2.5 Flash 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 Gemini 2.5 Flash
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGemini 2.5 FlashLeader
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
Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.0015Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.022Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.085Fits 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 Gemini 2.5 Flash
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingGoogle Gemini 2.5 Flash
MakerArcee AIGoogle
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 1, 2026June 17, 2025
Context window262K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.80$2.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.466
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Gemini 2.5 Flash for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 3.1x cheaper ($0.80 vs $2.50 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemini 2.5 Flash comparison based on?

42 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Gemini 2.5 Flash's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next