Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max 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 2026-09-09.
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max … scores 39.8 points higher (50.7 vs 10.9) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($7275 vs $518; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max … when you need intelligence above 10.9, and Trinity Large Thinking when 10.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 50.7 | 10.9 | −78.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 78.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,274.74 | $518.07 | −92.9% Trinity Large Thinking is 92.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 79.18s | 8.78s | −88.9% Trinity Large Thinking is 88.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Claude Opus 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort): 78.5% less intelligence, 92.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 88.9% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Astra (max) scores 52.80 for $5324.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill