Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs GLM 5

GLM 5 leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.9 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 4.0x less per output token ($0.80 vs $3.20 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 48 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace GLM 5
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
1
GLM 5Z.ai
Coding
41.7
Overall
54.3
Output $/M
$3.20
47
vs boards won of 48 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 5: which to pick

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 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 4.0x cheaper ($0.80 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGLM 5Z.ai41.7/1003 independent benchmarks$0.63 per solved task
Shared results
48
Trinity Large Thinking only
4
GLM 5 only
28
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 5 41.7 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 24.9 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Trinity Large Thinking 38.0% against GLM 5 75.7%, 37.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against GLM 5 $3.20 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, GLM 5 205K.

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 5Ties
Coding06
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge15
Web design08
General019
All shared boards147
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured72.8%Only GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured69.7%Only GLM 5 measured
LMArena WebDev12381435GLM 5
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured81.9%Only GLM 5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured71.4%Only GLM 5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured23.4%Only GLM 5 measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%43.2%GLM 5
Terminal-BenchNot measured52.4%Only GLM 5 measured
WeirdMLNot measured48.2%Only GLM 5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured765.6Only GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13571461GLM 5
LMArena Text: software and IT13621460GLM 5
LMArena WebDev: React12311424GLM 5
LMArena WebDev: HTML12401450GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.827.9GLM 5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured145.8Only GLM 5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1123Only GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1136Only GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1146Only GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1144Only GLM 5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1148Only GLM 5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%98.2%GLM 5
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$4,432Only GLM 5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured83.3%Only GLM 5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%82.0%GLM 5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%29.3%GLM 5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured87.8%Only GLM 5 measured
ARC-AGINot measured44.7%Only GLM 5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.9%Only GLM 5 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured53.2%Only GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421452GLM 5
LMArena Text: expert13591454GLM 5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561460GLM 5
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured75.0%Only GLM 5 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 GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
AIMENot measured91.7%Only GLM 5 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured80.0%Only GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: math13651440GLM 5
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501451GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured86.0%Only GLM 5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.1%Only GLM 5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%52.5%Trinity Large Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%62.9%GLM 5
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured70.0%Only GLM 5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured94.3%Only GLM 5 measured
LMArena Text: science13551460GLM 5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491455GLM 5
LMArena Text: legal and government13451453GLM 5
LMArena Text: business and finance13291430GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
Design Arena: websites11371247GLM 5
Design Arena: UI components10451230GLM 5
Design Arena: game dev10791234GLM 5
Design Arena: data viz10981228GLM 5
Design Arena: 3D10821229GLM 5
Design Arena: all code categories11171246GLM 5
Design Arena: SVG10171168GLM 5
Design Arena: ASCII art10411147GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GLM 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 5Leader
IFBench56.3%72.3%GLM 5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%75.7%GLM 5
CL-benchNot measured18.7%Only GLM 5 measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401446GLM 5
LMArena Text: instruction following13261428GLM 5
LMArena Text: creative writing13081438GLM 5
LMArena Text: English13561458GLM 5
LMArena Text: non-English13251430GLM 5
LMArena Text: Chinese13711511GLM 5
LMArena Text: German13561447GLM 5
LMArena Text: Japanese13121416GLM 5
LMArena Text: Korean13061423GLM 5
LMArena Text: French13661456GLM 5
LMArena Text: Spanish13271454GLM 5
LMArena Text: Russian13381436GLM 5
LMArena Text: Polish13121434GLM 5
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201456GLM 5
LMArena Text: longer queries13181446GLM 5
LMArena Text: writing and language13171437GLM 5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961426GLM 5
Neither model has a result on the other 25 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 5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGLM 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
GLM 5$0.0026Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
GLM 5$0.060Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
GLM 5$0.232Exceeds the context window

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 GLM 5
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingZ.ai GLM 5
MakerArcee AIZ.ai
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026February 11, 2026
Context window262K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$1.00
Output $/Mtok$0.80$3.20
Coding indexNot benchmarked41.7
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.63
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than GLM 5 for coding?

Only GLM 5 has a coding score, 41.7 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 4.0x cheaper ($0.80 vs $3.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 5?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; GLM 5 costs $1.00 and $3.20. Cost per solved task is known for GLM 5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or GLM 5?

Trinity Large Thinking, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs GLM 5 comparison based on?

48 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 5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next