MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash scores 31.9 points higher (42.7 vs 10.8) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $233; both mid-range class). Pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Trinity Large Thinking.
| Metric | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.7 | 10.8 | −74.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 74.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $283.18 | $232.95 | −17.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 17.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 23.93s | 8.25s | −65.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 65.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.15 / $0.60 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash: 74.7% less intelligence, 17.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 65.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 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.
MiniMax-M3.1-FlashTrinity 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-m3-1-flash/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/minimax-m3-1-flash/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill