Mistral Small 3.2 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Mistral Small 3.2 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 3.8 points higher (10.8 vs 7.0) but costs 1.9× as much to run the benchmark ($233 vs $122; both mid-range class). Pick Trinity Large Thinking when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mistral Small 3.2.
| Metric | Mistral Small 3.2 | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 7.0 | 10.8 | +54.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 54.3% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $121.78 | $232.95 | +91.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 91.3% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.54s | 8.25s | −34.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 34.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.07 / $0.20 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Mistral Small 3.2: 54.3% more intelligence, 91.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 34.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mistral Small 3.2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Mistral Small 3.2Trinity 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-3-2/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mistral-small-3-2/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill