Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety

Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety costs 4.0x less per output token than Trinity Large Thinking ($0.20 vs $0.80 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
Nemotron 3.5 Content SafetyNVIDIA
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
vs $0.80 vs $0.20 per 1M output tokens. Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety is 4.0x cheaper.

Trinity Large Thinking or Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety: 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).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Trinity Large Thinking has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead.

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, Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety $0.20 per million output tokens, 4.0x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index8 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
LMArena WebDev1238Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
AA Coding Index25.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large 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 31 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.8Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
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 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
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
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large 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 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20 boards measured
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingNemotron 3.5 Content SafetyLeader
IFBench56.3%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large 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 26 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
Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety$0.0003Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety$0.011Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety$0.042Exceeds the context window

Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety 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 Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety
MakerArcee AINVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedApril 1, 2026June 4, 2026
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.20
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 Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety 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).

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety costs $0.20 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety?

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

Has any benchmark tested both Trinity Large Thinking and Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Trinity Large Thinking has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next