Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medium Effort) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medium Effort) by Anthropic or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-19.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medi… scores 39.9 points higher (58.6 vs 18.7) but costs 4.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1116 vs $255; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medi… when you need intelligence above 18.7, and Trinity Large Thinking when 18.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medium Effort) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 58.6 | 18.7 | −68.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 68.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,116.24 | $254.72 | −77.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 77.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.10s | 14.08s | −12.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 12.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.23 / $0.88 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Medium Effort): 68.1% less intelligence, 77.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 12.5% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Grok 4.6 (high) scores 60.90 for $1068.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-medium/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-medium/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill