DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) scores 34.3 points higher (45.1 vs 10.8) but costs 1.9× as much to run the benchmark ($445 vs $233; both mid-range class). Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Trinity Large Thinking.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.1 | 10.8 | −76.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 76.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $444.60 | $232.95 | −47.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 47.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 14.55s | 8.30s | −43.0% Trinity Large Thinking is 43.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max): 76.1% less intelligence, 47.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 43.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)Trinity Large ThinkingToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill