MiniMax-M2.7 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: MiniMax-M2.7 by MiniMax 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.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick MiniMax-M2.7
Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax-M2.7: 53.0% less intelligence, 119.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 79.2% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | MiniMax-M2.7 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 23.2 | 10.9 | −53.0% Trinity Large Thinking is 53.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $235.96 | $518.07 | +119.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 2.2× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 42.23s | 8.78s | −79.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 79.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- MiniMax-M2.7 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (xhigh) scores 34.80 for $179.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
MiniMax-M2.7Trinity 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/minimax-m2-7/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/minimax-m2-7/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill