Inkling (xhigh) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Inkling (xhigh) by Thinking Machines or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-22.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Inkling (xhigh) scores 14.2 points higher (25.0 vs 10.8) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($1026 vs $518; both premium class). Pick Inkling (xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Trinity Large Thinking.
| Metric | Inkling (xhigh) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 25.0 | 10.8 | −56.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 56.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,026.14 | $518.07 | −49.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 49.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 27.45s | 9.39s | −65.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 65.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $4.05 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Inkling (xhigh): 56.8% less intelligence, 49.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 65.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Inkling (xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Inkling (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/inkling/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/inkling/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill