Llama 4 Maverick vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Maverick by Meta or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Trinity Large Thinking scores 1.5 points higher (10.8 vs 9.3) but costs 5.3× as much to run the benchmark ($233 vs $44.0; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Trinity Large Thinking when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Maverick | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.3 | 10.8 | +16.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 16.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $43.98 | $232.95 | +429.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 5.3× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.94s | 8.25s | −24.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 24.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.92 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Llama 4 Maverick: 16.1% more intelligence, 429.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 24.6% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Maverick is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Llama 4 MaverickTrinity 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/llama-4-maverick/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-maverick/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill