Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Trinity Large Thinking vs Qwen3.6 Plus

Qwen3.6 Plus leads Trinity Large Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 27.0 to 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking costs 2.4x less per output token ($0.80 vs $1.95 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 49 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Trinity Large Thinking Replace Qwen3.6 Plus
Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.80
1
Qwen3.6 PlusQwen
Coding
44.1
Overall
56.2
Output $/M
$1.95
48
vs boards won of 49 shared

Trinity Large Thinking or Qwen3.6 Plus: which to pick

Only Qwen3.6 Plus has a coding score, 44.1 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 2.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.95 per million) and work measured by CaseLaw (Vals AI), where it leads.

Model ATrinity Large ThinkingArcee AINot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3.6 PlusQwen44.1/1003 independent benchmarks$1.19 per solved task
Shared results
49
Trinity Large Thinking only
3
Qwen3.6 Plus only
34
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, Qwen3.6 Plus 44.1 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 27.3 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Trinity Large Thinking 38.0% against Qwen3.6 Plus 78.3%, 40.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Trinity Large Thinking $0.80 against Qwen3.6 Plus $1.95 per million output tokens, 2.4x apart.
Context window
Trinity Large Thinking takes 262K tokens, Qwen3.6 Plus 1M.

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 ThinkingBarsQwen3.6 PlusTies
Coding07
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math02
Knowledge15
Web design08
General019
All shared boards148
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index07
Coding benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
LMArena WebDev12381461Qwen3.6 Plus
AA Coding Index25.854.5Qwen3.6 Plus
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured73.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured25.6%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured11.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured53.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
SciCode40.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)22.7%43.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
ALE-BenchNot measured670.1Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: coding13571467Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: software and IT13621462Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: React12311454Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: HTML12401463Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1472Only Qwen3.6 Plus 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 Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.827.0Qwen3.6 Plus
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured147.3Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured40.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured14.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured32.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
τ²-Bench Telecom90.1%97.7%Qwen3.6 Plus
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$5,115Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)75.2%88.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)15.8%27.8%Qwen3.6 Plus
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured88.4%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured14.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured12.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13421448Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: expert13591454Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13561455Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
AIMENot measured94.6%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured93.3%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured38.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: math13651449Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: mathematical work13501448Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Knowledge benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
MMLU ProNot measured87.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.2%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)57.9%51.5%Trinity Large Thinking
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.7%61.9%Qwen3.6 Plus
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.7%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured36.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured44.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMArena Text: science13551439Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13491442Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: legal and government13451437Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: business and finance13291430Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Web design benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
Design Arena: websites11371243Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: UI components10421230Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: game dev10781211Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: data viz10981228Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: 3D10811202Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: all code categories11171236Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: SVG10161161Qwen3.6 Plus
Design Arena: ASCII art10411113Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Trinity Large Thinking and Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured44.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.0%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured51.5%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
IFBench56.3%75.2%Qwen3.6 Plus
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)38.0%78.3%Qwen3.6 Plus
DTBenchNot measured81.9%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
LMCANot measured33.1%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
CL-benchNot measured20.3%Only Qwen3.6 Plus measured
Surface Evolver Bench15.6%Not measuredOnly Trinity Large Thinking measured
LMArena Text13401436Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: instruction following13261424Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: creative writing13081404Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: English13561445Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: non-English13251424Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Chinese13711477Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: German13561451Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Japanese13121390Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Korean13061379Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: French13661455Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Spanish13271432Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Russian13381434Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: Polish13121433Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: multi-turn13201438Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: longer queries13181439Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: writing and language13171418Qwen3.6 Plus
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12961402Qwen3.6 Plus
Neither model has a result on the other 20 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 Qwen3.6 Plus
BenchmarkTrinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 PlusLeader
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
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.0013Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.015Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.022Fits in one request

Trinity Large Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Trinity Large Thinking$0.058Fits in one request
Qwen3.6 Plus$0.085Fits 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 Qwen3.6 Plus
SpecificationArcee AI Trinity Large ThinkingQwen3.6 Plus
MakerArcee AIQwen
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 1, 2026April 2, 2026
Context window262K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.325
Output $/Mtok$0.80$1.95
Coding indexNot benchmarked44.1
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.19
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Qwen3.6 Plus for coding?

Only Qwen3.6 Plus has a coding score, 44.1 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 2.4x cheaper ($0.80 vs $1.95 per million) and work measured by CaseLaw (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Thinking or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus costs $0.325 and $1.95. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.6 Plus only.

Which has the bigger context window, Trinity Large Thinking or Qwen3.6 Plus?

Qwen3.6 Plus, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the Trinity Large Thinking vs Qwen3.6 Plus comparison based on?

49 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.6 Plus's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next