Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2) vs Trinity Large Thinking

Which is better for the money: Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2) by Multiverse Computing 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

Multiverse ComputingQuasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2)Off the frontier

Intelligence: 27.10
Total cost: $2504

Arcee AITrinity Large ThinkingOff the frontier

Intelligence: 10.90
Total cost: $518

Verdict

Depends on your budget

Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2) scores 16.2 points higher (27.1 vs 10.9) but costs 4.8× as much to run the benchmark ($2504 vs $518; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2) when you need intelligence above 10.9, and Trinity Large Thinking when 10.9 is enough.

Metric	Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2)	Trinity Large Thinking	Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)	27.1	10.9	−59.8% Trinity Large Thinking is 59.8% less intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)	$2,503.70	$518.07	−79.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 79.3% cheaper
End-to-end time (lower is better)	16.15s	8.78s	−45.6% Trinity Large Thinking is 45.6% faster
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)	$0.60 / $1.80	$0.25 / $0.90
Input modalities	Not reported	Not reported

Trinity Large Thinking vs Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2): 59.8% less intelligence, 79.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 45.6% faster end-to-end.

Open this matchup in the interactive picker Quasar 438B (max, based on GLM-5.2): what beats it Trinity Large Thinking: what beats it

Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/quasar-438b/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/quasar-438b/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill

Depends on your budget

Against the frontier

Compare something else