Mistral Large 3 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Mistral Large 3 by Mistral or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-17.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Trinity Large Thinking scores 2.8 points higher (18.7 vs 15.9) but costs 3.6× as much to run the benchmark ($255 vs $71.1; both mid-range class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Trinity Large Thinking when you need intelligence above 15.9, and Mistral Large 3 when 15.9 is enough.
| Metric | Mistral Large 3 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 15.9 | 18.7 | +17.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 17.6% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $71.14 | $254.72 | +258.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 3.6× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.78s | 13.49s | +25.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 25.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.50 / $1.50 | $0.23 / $0.88 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Mistral Large 3: 17.6% more intelligence, 258.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 25.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Large 3 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (high) scores 47.00 for $55.0.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
Mistral Large 3Trinity 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/mistral-large-3/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-large-3/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill