Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. 35 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
No data
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.80
35
Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
6.9
Output $/M
$0.08
0
vs boards won of 35 shared

Decision reading

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

Trinity Large Thinking has the edge where the context window is larger, 262K against 131K tokens.

Shared results
35
Trinity Large Thinking only
17
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
15
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 not benchmarked, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 73.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Trinity Large Thinking 90.1% against Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 16.4%, 73.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 ThinkingBarsLlama 3.1 8B InstructTies
Coding40
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Math20
Knowledge40
General180
All shared boards350
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.85.4Trinity Large Thinking
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured11.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%0.8%Trinity Large Thinking
WeirdMLNot measured1.7%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding13571195Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: software and IT13621195Trinity 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 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.86.9Trinity Large Thinking
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured116.5Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%16.4%Trinity Large Thinking
BALROGNot measured15.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%25.9%Trinity Large Thinking
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%5.3%Trinity Large Thinking
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured27.0%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421175Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: expert13591144Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561196Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured4.3Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.3%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured1.7%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured22.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8KNot measured82.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math13651179Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501180Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured47.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured56.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science13551193Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491182Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: legal and government13451206Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: business and finance13291166Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 9 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1137Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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: SVG1017Not 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 index180
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
IFBench56.3%28.6%Trinity Large Thinking
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%18.0%Trinity Large Thinking
DTBenchNot measured50.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured5.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
PIQANot measured81.2%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text13401187Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: instruction following13261159Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: creative writing13081154Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: English13561218Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: non-English13251148Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Chinese13711151Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: German13561144Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Japanese13121061Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Korean13061053Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: French13661178Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Spanish13271169Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Russian13381158Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Polish1312Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201172Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: longer queries13181181Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: writing and language13171162Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961145Trinity Large Thinking
Neither model has a result on the other 23 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingLlama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
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
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingMeta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
MakerArcee AIMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026July 23, 2024
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.05
Output $/Mtok$0.80$0.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Trinity Large Thinking has the edge where the context window is larger, 262K against 131K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 and $0.08. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

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

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next