Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax M2.5

MiniMax M2.5 leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 22.8 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; 47 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace MiniMax M2.5
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
4
MiniMax M2.5MiniMax
Coding
37.2
Overall
37.3
Output $/M
$1.20
43
vs boards won of 47 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or MiniMax M2.5: which to pick

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Trinity Large Thinking has none, 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).

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMiniMax M2.5MiniMax37.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.62 per solved task
Shared results
47
Trinity Large Thinking only
5
MiniMax M2.5 only
21
Like-for-like categories
8 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, MiniMax M2.5 37.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 15.6 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Trinity Large Thinking 38.0% against MiniMax M2.5 73.3%, 35.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against MiniMax M2.5 $1.20 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, MiniMax M2.5 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryTrinity Large ThinkingBarsMiniMax M2.5Ties
Coding06
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge15
Web design07
General316
All shared boards443
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured75.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench MultilingualNot measured68.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena WebDev12381386MiniMax M2.5
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured79.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%34.8%MiniMax M2.5
Terminal-BenchNot measured42.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured618.2Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding13571380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: software and IT13621383MiniMax M2.5
LMArena WebDev: React12311374MiniMax M2.5
LMArena WebDev: HTML12401414MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.822.8MiniMax M2.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.6Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%95.3%MiniMax M2.5
Vending-Bench 2Not measured-$23Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured82.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%84.8%MiniMax M2.5
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%20.5%MiniMax M2.5
ARC-AGINot measured63.7%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured4.9%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421372MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: expert13591378MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561384MiniMax M2.5
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured55.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
AIMENot measured88.8%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
ProofBenchNot measured4.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math13651378MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501378MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
MMLU ProNot measured80.1%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.0%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%53.5%Trinity Large Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%59.6%MiniMax M2.5
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured92.5%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text: science13551369MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491357MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: legal and government13451366MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: business and finance13291356MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index07
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites11371222MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: UI components10421173MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: game dev10781176MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: data viz10981172MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: 3D10811170MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: all code categories11171207MiniMax M2.5
Design Arena: SVG10161150MiniMax M2.5
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 index316
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
IFBench56.3%71.6%MiniMax M2.5
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%73.3%MiniMax M2.5
CL-benchNot measured11.4%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured6.3%Only MiniMax M2.5 measured
LMArena Text13401359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: instruction following13261353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: creative writing13081331MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: English13561380MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: non-English13251338MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Chinese13711393MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: German13561361MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Japanese13121171Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Korean13061233Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: French13661363Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text: Spanish13271353MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Russian13381359MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: Polish13121334MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201364MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: longer queries13181366MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: writing and language13171345MiniMax M2.5
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961329MiniMax M2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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 MiniMax M2.5
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5Leader
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
MiniMax M2.5$0.0009Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.019Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.5$0.072Exceeds the context window

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 MiniMax M2.5
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingMiniMax M2.5
MakerArcee AIMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026February 12, 2026
Context window262K205K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.80$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarked37.2
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.62
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than MiniMax M2.5 for coding?

Only MiniMax M2.5 has a coding score, 37.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Trinity Large Thinking has none, 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 M2.5?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.5 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Cost per solved task is known for MiniMax M2.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or MiniMax M2.5?

Trinity Large Thinking, with 262K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax M2.5 comparison based on?

47 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 M2.5's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next