Model comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Arcee AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher in 2 categories and Trinity Large Thinking in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 37.6 to 19.2.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 34.6 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2024-06-20 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 60 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.0 (#165), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1342 | 1381 |
| Aider Polyglot | 51.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| GSO | 4.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 40% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 46.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 67.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 58.6% | — |
| CadEval | 48% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 81.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 32.3 (#67), Trinity Large Thinking: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 24% | — |
| Cybench | 17.5% | — |
| BALROG | 32.6% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 23.1 (#183), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1305 | 1350 |
| SimpleBench | 41.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 56.7% | — |
| DTBench | 67.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 55% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.55 | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.7 | — |
| LiveBench | 59% | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 19.2 (#288), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1307 | 1366 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 8.5% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 27.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 52.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 56.9% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 2.1% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 0% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 28.6 (#245), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1265 | 1360 |
| GPQA Diamond | 55.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 77.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 19.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 56.5% | — |
| MMLU | 87.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 26.5 (#120), Trinity Large Thinking: —
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1125 | — |
| Video-MME | 60% | — |
| GeoBench | 62% | — |
| VPCT | 33% | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 43.2 (#185), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1283 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1272 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1305 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1297 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1234 | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | 1200 | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | 1306 | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1290 | 1357 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 68.8 (#182), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1334 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 69.3% | — |
| IFEval | 85.5% | — |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 39.9 (#167), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1311 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Too close to call
Claude 3.5 Sonnet: 52.9 (#164), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1298 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1292 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1326 | 1342 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 80.3% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1451 | — |
| WildBench | 79.2% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 53.8% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 34.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Claude 3.5 Sonnet scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.0 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Trinity Large Thinking share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 3.5 Sonnet has 60 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.