GPT-5 (high) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 (high) by OpenAI or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-17.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5 (high) scores 16.6 points higher (35.3 vs 18.7) but costs 3.1× as much to run the benchmark ($789 vs $255; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5 (high) when you need intelligence above 18.7, and Trinity Large Thinking when 18.7 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 (high) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 35.3 | 18.7 | −47.0% Trinity Large Thinking is 47.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $789.34 | $254.72 | −67.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 67.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 110.75s | 13.49s | −87.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 87.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.23 / $0.88 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs GPT-5 (high): 47.0% less intelligence, 67.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 87.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 (high) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) scores 56.80 for $639.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
GPT-5 (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/gpt-5/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill