LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Kimi K2 Thinking

Updated October 21, 2026. 10 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
5.4
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.80
1
Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI
Coding
63.4
Overall
22.0
Output $/M
$2.50
9
vs boards won of 10 shared

Decision reading

Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for coding: it scores 63.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 5.4 for Trinity Large Thinking.

Pick Trinity Large Thinking when output tokens cost 3.1x less, or when the benchmark that matters is Design Arena: websites, where it leads.

Shared results
10
Trinity Large Thinking only
42
Kimi K2 Thinking only
20
Like-for-like categories
7 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, Kimi K2 Thinking 63.4 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
General, 22.9 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Trinity Large Thinking 38.0% against Kimi K2 Thinking 72.0%, 34.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Kimi K2 Thinking $2.50 per million output tokens, 3.1x apart.
Context window
Both take 262K tokens.

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 ThinkingBarsKimi K2 ThinkingTies
Coding01
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning02
Knowledge02
Web design10
General02
All shared boards19
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured63.4%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured63.1%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured60.2%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.3%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%31.1%Kimi K2 Thinking
Terminal-BenchNot measured35.7%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
WeirdMLNot measured42.8%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
ALE-BenchNot measured597.5Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LMArena Text: coding1357Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1362Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: React1231Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1240Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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 Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.822.0Kimi K2 Thinking
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured145.8Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%93.0%Kimi K2 Thinking
METR time horizonsNot measured59.2%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured78.5%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%83.8%Kimi K2 Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%23.8%Kimi K2 Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts1342Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: expert1359Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1356Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
AIMENot measured85.4%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured90.2%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AA Math IndexNot measured94.7Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured94.7%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
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 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
MMLU ProNot measured81.1%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.2%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%65.7%Kimi K2 Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%60.6%Kimi K2 Thinking
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured71.7%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured92.6%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.8%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
LMArena Text: science1355Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1349Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1345Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1329Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
Design Arena: websites11371113Trinity Large Thinking
Design Arena: UI components1045Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: game dev1079Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: data viz1098Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Design Arena: 3D1082Not 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 index02
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
IFBench56.3%68.1%Kimi K2 Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%72.0%Kimi K2 Thinking
CL-benchNot measured17.6%Only Kimi K2 Thinking measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text1340Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1326Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1308Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: English1356Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: non-English1325Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1371Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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: Russian1338Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1320Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1318Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1317Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1296Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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 Kimi K2 Thinking
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingKimi K2 ThinkingLeader
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
Kimi K2 Thinking$0.0019Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Kimi K2 Thinking$0.037Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Kimi K2 Thinking$0.145Fits in one request

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 Kimi K2 Thinking
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingMoonshotAI Kimi K2 Thinking
MakerArcee AIMoonshot AI
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026November 6, 2025
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.60
Output $/Mtok$0.80$2.50
Coding index5.463.4
Independent measurements behind it11
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.61
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Kimi K2 Thinking for coding?

Pick Kimi K2 Thinking for coding: it scores 63.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 5.4 for Trinity Large Thinking. Pick Trinity Large Thinking when output tokens cost 3.1x less, or when the benchmark that matters is Design Arena: websites, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Kimi K2 Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Kimi K2 Thinking costs $0.60 and $2.50. Cost per solved task is known for Kimi K2 Thinking only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Kimi K2 Thinking?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Kimi K2 Thinking comparison based on?

10 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Kimi K2 Thinking's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next