Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) by Meta or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) scores 23.4 points higher (34.3 vs 10.9) but costs 3.4× as much to run the benchmark ($1737 vs $518; both premium class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) when you need intelligence above 10.9, and Trinity Large Thinking when 10.9 is enough.
| Metric | Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.3 | 10.9 | −68.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 68.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,737.18 | $518.07 | −70.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 70.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 8.78s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $4.25 | $0.25 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Trinity Large Thinking vs Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh): 68.2% less intelligence, 70.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Astra (low) scores 46.00 for $1537.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh)Trinity 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/muse-spark-1-1/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-spark-1-1/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill