Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Mistral Medium 3.5 by Mistral or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-08-19.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Mistral Medium 3.5 scores 11.7 points higher (30.4 vs 18.7) but costs 3.5× as much to run the benchmark ($883 vs $255; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Mistral Medium 3.5 when you need intelligence above 18.7, and Trinity Large Thinking when 18.7 is enough.
| Metric | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 30.4 | 18.7 | −38.5% Trinity Large Thinking is 38.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $883.33 | $254.72 | −71.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 71.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 21.23s | 14.08s | −33.7% Trinity Large Thinking is 33.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.50 / $7.50 | $0.23 / $0.88 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Mistral Medium 3.5: 38.5% less intelligence, 71.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 33.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Medium 3.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) scores 56.80 for $639.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-5.6 Luna (max) scores 52.30 for $172.
Mistral Medium 3.5Trinity 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-3-5/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-medium-3-5/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill