Model comparison
Command R vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Arcee AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Trinity Large Thinking in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 38.2.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.80 for Trinity Large Thinking.
- Trinity Large Thinking accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Command R | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 262K |
| Max output | 4K | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 28.0 (#246), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1366 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1360 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | 1357 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1334 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | Command R | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1342 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Command R or Trinity Large Thinking?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Trinity Large Thinking lists at $0.25 and $0.80.
Is Command R or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Trinity Large Thinking does, with 262K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and Trinity Large Thinking share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.