Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Granite 4.2 8B

Granite 4.2 8B leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 11.1 to 10.8, and Granite 4.2 8B costs 4.0x less per output token ($0.20 vs $0.80 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 27 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace Granite 4.2 8B
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
20
Granite 4.2 8BIBM Granite
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
7
vs boards won of 27 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or Granite 4.2 8B: which to pick

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

Pick Trinity Large Thinking for a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BGranite 4.2 8BIBM GraniteNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
27
Trinity Large Thinking only
25
Granite 4.2 8B only
0
Like-for-like categories
6 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, Granite 4.2 8B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 5.4 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): Trinity Large Thinking 75.2% against Granite 4.2 8B 63.1%, 12.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Granite 4.2 8B $0.20 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Granite 4.2 8B 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 ThinkingBarsGranite 4.2 8BTies
Coding22
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning41
Knowledge40
General102
All shared boards207
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index22
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.822.4Trinity Large Thinking
SciCode40.6%31.5%Trinity Large Thinking
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: coding13571378Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: software and IT13621367Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.811.1Granite 4.2 8B
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Agentic Index1.01.3Granite 4.2 8B
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%63.1%Trinity Large Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%9.7%Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421327Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: expert13591386Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561345Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
LMArena Text: math1365Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1350Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: science13551336Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491336Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: legal and government13451327Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: business and finance13291322Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
Design Arena: websites1137Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: UI components1042Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: game dev1078Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: data viz1098Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: 3D1081Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: all code categories1117Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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 index102
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
IFBench56.3%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%45.0%Granite 4.2 8B
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401319Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: instruction following13261300Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: creative writing13081236Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: English13561337Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: non-English13251301Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Chinese13711367Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: German1356Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Korean1306Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: French1366Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1327Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Russian13381282Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201301Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: longer queries13181325Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: writing and language13171269Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961271Trinity Large Thinking
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 Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingGranite 4.2 8BLeader
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
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0002Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0046Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.018Exceeds the context window

Granite 4.2 8B 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 Granite 4.2 8B
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingIBM Granite 4.2 8B
MakerArcee AIIBM Granite
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026August 31, 2026
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.08
Output $/Mtok$0.80$0.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Granite 4.2 8B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for a larger context window (262K against 131K tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: coding or LMArena Text: software and IT, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Granite 4.2 8B?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Granite 4.2 8B costs $0.08 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Granite 4.2 8B?

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

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Granite 4.2 8B comparison based on?

27 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Granite 4.2 8B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next