Trinity Large Thinking vs GPT-5.2 Pro
Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 10.8
- Output $/M
- $0.80
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $168.00
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Trinity Large Thinking has the edge where output tokens cost 210.0x less.
No benchmark has tested both yet. Trinity Large Thinking has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; GPT-5.2 Pro on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2. Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Trinity Large Thinking has a AA Intelligence Index result, 10.8.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Trinity Large Thinking has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.0.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Trinity Large Thinking has a Design Arena: websites result, 1137.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.2 Pro
GPT-5.2 Pro takes 400K tokens against 262K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking $0.0006, GPT-5.2 Pro $0.105 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Trinity Large Thinking not benchmarked, GPT-5.2 Pro not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against GPT-5.2 Pro $168.00 per million output tokens, 210.0x apart.
- Context window
- Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, GPT-5.2 Pro 400K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1238 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| AA Coding Index | 25.8 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| SciCode | 40.6% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.7% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1357 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1362 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1231 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1240 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.8 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 156.3 | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.0 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 90.1% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 75.2% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 15.8% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| ARC-AGI | Not measured | 90.5% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | Not measured | 54.2% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| SimpleBench | Not measured | 57.4% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 60.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1342 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1359 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1356 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 74.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 46.0% | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1365 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1350 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 57.9% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 54.7% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1355 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1349 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1345 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1329 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1137 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1045 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1079 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1098 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1082 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1117 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1017 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1041 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards measured
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | GPT-5.2 Pro | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 56.3% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 38.0% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 15.6% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text | 1340 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1326 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1308 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1356 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1325 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1371 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1356 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1312 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1306 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1366 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1327 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1338 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1312 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1320 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1318 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1317 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1296 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Trinity Large Thinking costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Arcee AI Trinity Large Thinking | OpenAI GPT-5.2 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Arcee AI | OpenAI |
| Weights | Open weights | No public weights listed |
| Released | April 1, 2026 | December 10, 2025 |
| Context window | 262K | 400K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $21.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.80 | $168.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Trinity Large Thinking better than GPT-5.2 Pro for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Trinity Large Thinking has the edge where output tokens cost 210.0x less.
Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or GPT-5.2 Pro?
Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Pro costs $21.00 and $168.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or GPT-5.2 Pro?
GPT-5.2 Pro, with 400K tokens against 262K.
Has any benchmark tested both Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5.2 Pro?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Trinity Large Thinking has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; GPT-5.2 Pro on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.