Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google 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
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 5.3 points higher (16.1 vs 10.8) but costs 3.5× as much to run the benchmark ($823 vs $233; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 2.5 Pro when you need intelligence above 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking when 10.8 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.1 | 10.8 | −32.9% Trinity Large Thinking is 32.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $822.85 | $232.95 | −71.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 71.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 27.13s | 8.30s | −69.4% Trinity Large Thinking is 69.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.9% less intelligence, 71.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 69.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Gemini 2.5 ProTrinity 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/gemini-2-5-pro/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill