Mistral Small 3.1 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Mistral Small 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 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Trinity Large Thinking scores 3.7 points higher (10.8 vs 7.1) but costs 8.4× as much to run the benchmark ($233 vs $27.8; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Trinity Large Thinking when you need intelligence above 7.1, and Mistral Small 3.1 when 7.1 is enough.
| Metric | Mistral Small 3.1 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 7.1 | 10.8 | +52.1% Trinity Large Thinking is 52.1% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $27.82 | $232.95 | +737.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 8.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.78s | 8.25s | −30.0% Trinity Large Thinking is 30.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.08 / $0.14 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Mistral Small 3.1: 52.1% more intelligence, 737.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 30.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Small 3.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Mistral Small 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-small-3-1/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-small-3-1/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill