Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax M2.1
MiniMax M2.1 leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 1.5x less per output token ($0.80 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 16 benchmarks have a result for both.
Trinity Large Thinking or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).
- Shared results
- 16
- Trinity Large Thinking only
- 36
- MiniMax M2.1 only
- 18
- Like-for-like categories
- 7 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
MiniMax M2.1
MiniMax M2.1 leads, 20.9 against 10.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Trinity Large Thinking has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.0.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a GPQA Diamond result, 78.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a AIME result, 77.9%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has a MMLU Pro result, 87.0%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
MiniMax M2.1
MiniMax M2.1 leads, 1201 against 1137.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens against 205K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking $0.0006, MiniMax M2.1 $0.0009 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only MiniMax M2.1 has the number, $0.59.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Trinity Large Thinking not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- General, 21.6 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Trinity Large Thinking 38.0% against MiniMax M2.1 67.7%, 29.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
- Context window
- Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, MiniMax M2.1 205K.
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.
| Category | Trinity Large Thinking | Bars | MiniMax M2.1 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 7 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 2 | 14 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1238 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| AA Coding Index | 25.8 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 81.8% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 74.8% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 81.0% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| SciCode | 40.6% | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 22.7% | 28.8% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 36.6% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 623.8 | Only MiniMax M2.1 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 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.8 | 20.9 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.0 | Not measured | Only Trinity Large Thinking measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 90.1% | 85.4% | Trinity Large Thinking |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 78.5% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 75.2% | 83.0% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 15.8% | 23.2% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| 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 16 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 77.9% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 89.0% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 87.8% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 82.7 | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 82.7% | Only MiniMax M2.1 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 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 87.0% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.5% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 57.9% | 55.8% | Trinity Large Thinking |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 54.7% | 58.9% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.3% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 91.2% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 34.1% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 87.5% | Only MiniMax M2.1 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 6 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1137 | 1201 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1042 | 1220 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1078 | 1134 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1098 | 1206 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1081 | 1164 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1117 | 1190 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: SVG | 1016 | 1131 | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 1041 | Not measured | Only 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
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 80.8% | Only MiniMax M2.1 measured |
| IFBench | 56.3% | 69.9% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 38.0% | 67.7% | MiniMax M2.1 |
| 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 25 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | MiniMax M2.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 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 | MiniMax M2.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Arcee AI | MiniMax |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | April 1, 2026 | December 23, 2025 |
| Context window | 262K | 205K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.30 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.80 | $1.20 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.59 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Trinity Large Thinking better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Trinity Large Thinking for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.20 per million) and a larger context window (262K against 205K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or MiniMax M2.1?
Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.1 only.
Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or MiniMax M2.1?
Trinity Large Thinking, with 262K tokens against 205K.
How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?
16 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and MiniMax M2.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.