Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs GPT-5 Nano

Updated October 21, 2026. 41 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace GPT-5 Nano
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
5.4
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.80
35
GPT-5 NanoOpenAI
Coding
34.8
Overall
13.0
Output $/M
$0.40
6
vs boards won of 41 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5 Nano for coding: it scores 34.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 5.4 for Trinity Large Thinking.

Pick Trinity Large Thinking when what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AI5.4/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGPT-5 NanoOpenAI34.8/1001 independent benchmark$0.109 per solved task
Shared results
41
Trinity Large Thinking only
11
GPT-5 Nano only
44
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 5.4 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5 Nano 34.8 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Agentic work, 53.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Trinity Large Thinking 90.1% against GPT-5 Nano 36.5%, 53.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against GPT-5 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, GPT-5 Nano 400K.

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 ThinkingBarsGPT-5 NanoTies
Coding30
Intelligence01
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math20
Knowledge50
Web design51
General144
All shared boards356
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured34.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%17.4%Trinity Large Thinking
Terminal-BenchNot measured21.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
WeirdMLNot measured38.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding13571351Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: software and IT13621345Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.813.0GPT-5 Nano
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured139.2Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%36.5%Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured63.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured70.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%67.6%Trinity Large Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%9.5%Trinity Large Thinking
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured69.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGINot measured20.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured2.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured22.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured9.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
VPCTNot measured37.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421328Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: expert13591321Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561338Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1141Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1157Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
AIMENot measured81.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured93.8%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured89.3%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
AA Math IndexNot measured83.7Only GPT-5 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured83.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured81.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured20.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured2.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
ProofBenchNot measured12.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MATH level 5Not measured95.2%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math13651317Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501326Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
MMLU ProNot measured76.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured50.1%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%52.6%Trinity Large Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured67.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured53.6%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured93.3%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured30.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.0%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured11.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science13551318Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491335Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: legal and government13451298Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: business and finance13291311Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index51
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites11371101Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: UI components10451066GPT-5 Nano
Design Arena: game dev10791045Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: data viz10981056Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: 3D1082966Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: all code categories11171084Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: SVG1016Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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 index144
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured30.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured72.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
IFBench56.3%67.6%GPT-5 Nano
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%45.0%GPT-5 Nano
DTBenchNot measured62.7%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMCANot measured7.9%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured44.4%Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401320Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: instruction following13261306Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: creative writing13081249Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena VisionNot measured1159Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English13561321Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: non-English13251313Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Chinese13711356Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: German13561327Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Japanese13121227Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Korean13061269Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: French1366Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Spanish13271360GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: Russian13381296Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Polish13121314GPT-5 Nano
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201311Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: longer queries13181312Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: writing and language13171283Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961268Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1170Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1176Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1152Only GPT-5 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1110Only GPT-5 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 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 GPT-5 Nano
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGPT-5 NanoLeader
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
GPT-5 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.0037Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
GPT-5 Nano$0.014Fits in one request

GPT-5 Nano 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 GPT-5 Nano
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingOpenAI GPT-5 Nano
MakerArcee AIOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 1, 2026August 7, 2025
Context window262K400K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.05
Output $/Mtok$0.80$0.40
Coding index5.434.8
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.109
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than GPT-5 Nano for coding?

Pick GPT-5 Nano for coding: it scores 34.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 5.4 for Trinity Large Thinking. Pick Trinity Large Thinking when what matters is Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or GPT-5 Nano?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; GPT-5 Nano costs $0.05 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or GPT-5 Nano?

GPT-5 Nano, with 400K tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs GPT-5 Nano comparison based on?

41 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5 Nano's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next