Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs GLM 4.5 Air

GLM 4.5 Air leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 11.1 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 1.4x less per output token ($0.80 vs $1.10 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 42 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace GLM 4.5 Air
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
5
GLM 4.5 AirZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
37
vs boards won of 42 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 4.5 Air: 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 1.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.10 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens).

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 4.5 AirZ.aiNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
42
Trinity Large Thinking only
10
GLM 4.5 Air only
6
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, GLM 4.5 Air not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 43.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Trinity Large Thinking 90.1% against GLM 4.5 Air 46.5%, 43.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against GLM 4.5 Air $1.10 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, GLM 4.5 Air 131K.

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 ThinkingBarsGLM 4.5 AirTies
Coding12
Intelligence01
Agentic work10
Reasoning23
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design07
General118
All shared boards537
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index12
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured68.4%Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%20.5%Trinity Large Thinking
GSO-BenchNot measured2.9%Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: coding13571397GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: software and IT13621401GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.811.1GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%46.5%Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%73.3%Trinity Large Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%7.0%Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421379GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: expert13591370GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561388GLM 4.5 Air
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured43.0%Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured80.7Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.7%Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: math13651396GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501396GLM 4.5 Air
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 GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured81.5%Only GLM 4.5 Air measured
LMArena Text: science13551407GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491402GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: legal and government13451382GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: business and finance13291371GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
Design Arena: websites11371146GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: UI components10451123GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: game dev10791094GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: data viz10981186GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: 3D10821123GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: all code categories11171137GLM 4.5 Air
Design Arena: SVG10171071GLM 4.5 Air
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 GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
IFBench56.3%37.6%Trinity Large Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%46.7%GLM 4.5 Air
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401384GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: instruction following13261354GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: creative writing13081343GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: English13561397GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: non-English13251366GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Chinese13711426GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: German13561377GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Japanese13121348GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Korean13061308GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: French13661400GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Spanish13271385GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Russian13381373GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: Polish13121368GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201371GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: longer queries13181366GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: writing and language13171354GLM 4.5 Air
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961339GLM 4.5 Air
Neither model has a result on the other 26 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 GLM 4.5 Air
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 4.5 AirLeader
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
GLM 4.5 Air$0.0008Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
GLM 4.5 Air$0.013Fits in one request

GLM 4.5 Air costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
GLM 4.5 Air$0.051Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.5 Air 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 GLM 4.5 Air
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingZ.ai GLM 4.5 Air
MakerArcee AIZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026July 25, 2025
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.20
Output $/Mtok$0.80$1.10
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than GLM 4.5 Air for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 1.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.10 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 4.5 Air?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; GLM 4.5 Air costs $0.20 and $1.10. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 4.5 Air?

Trinity Large Thinking, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs GLM 4.5 Air 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 GLM 4.5 Air's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next