Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) 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 3.5 Flash (High) scores 21.8 points higher (32.6 vs 10.8) but costs 18× as much to run the benchmark ($4222 vs $233; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) when you need intelligence above 10.8, and Trinity Large Thinking when 10.8 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.6 | 10.8 | −66.9% Trinity Large Thinking is 66.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,222.12 | $232.95 | −94.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 94.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.65s | 8.30s | −50.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 50.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.50 / $9.00 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Gemini 3.5 Flash (High): 66.9% less intelligence, 94.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 50.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 3.5 Flash (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Gemini 3.5 Flash (High)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/gemini-3-5-flash/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-3-5-flash/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill