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 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Trinity Large Thinking scores 1.6 points higher (10.9 vs 9.3) but costs 11× as much to run the benchmark ($518 vs $45.5; premium 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 | 10.9 | +17.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 17.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $45.50 | $518.07 | +1038.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 11× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.30s | 8.78s | +39.4% Trinity Large Thinking is 39.4% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.26 / $0.91 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Llama 4 Maverick: 17.2% more intelligence, 1038.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.4% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Maverick is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5 scores 22.30 for $42.6.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
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