Mistral Medium 3.1 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Mistral Medium 3.1 by Mistral or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-22.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Trinity Large Thinking scores 1.6 points higher (10.8 vs 9.2) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($518 vs $406; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Trinity Large Thinking when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mistral Medium 3.1.
| Metric | Mistral Medium 3.1 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.2 | 10.8 | +17.4% Trinity Large Thinking is 17.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $405.87 | $518.07 | +27.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 27.6% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 5.93s | 9.39s | +58.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 58.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.40 / $2.00 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Mistral Medium 3.1: 17.4% more intelligence, 27.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 58.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Medium 3.1 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.
Mistral Medium 3.1Trinity 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-medium-3-1/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-medium-3-1/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill