Model comparison
Claude 2 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 24.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Arcee AISummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 34.9 to 8.7.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 24.7 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2023-07-11 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1381 |
| HumanEval+ | 61.6% | — |
Reasoning Claude 2 leads
Claude 2: 20.8 (#213), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1350 |
| DTBench | 51.9% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 120.08 | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 2: 8.7 (#314), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1366 |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.7% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 2: 17.0 (#282), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 34.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1359 |
| MMLU | 78.5% | — |
| TriviaQA | 87.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1372 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1312 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1338 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1356 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1334 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)
| Benchmark | Claude 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1342 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2 better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 24.7 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2 and Trinity Large Thinking share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2 has 8 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.