GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 40.2 points higher (51.0 vs 10.8) but costs 2.8× as much to run the benchmark ($662 vs $233; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Trinity Large Thinking.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.0 | 10.8 | −78.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 78.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $662.28 | $232.95 | −64.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 64.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 86.31s | 8.30s | −90.4% Trinity Large Thinking is 90.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh): 78.8% less intelligence, 64.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 90.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh)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-6-1-sol-xhigh/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-sol-xhigh/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill