Model comparison
Falcon-180B vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 6 shared benchmarks.
Technology Innovation Institute
Arcee AISummary
- They share 6 benchmarks with published results for both. Falcon-180B scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 54.0 to 29.3.
Side by side
| Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Technology Innovation Institute | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 31.8 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2023-09-06 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1381 |
Reasoning Falcon-180B leads
Falcon-180B: 18.3 (#266), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1007 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 111.89 | — |
| HellaSwag | 89% | — |
| LAMBADA | 79.8% | — |
| PIQA | 84.9% | — |
| WinoGrande | 87.1% | — |
Math Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1366 |
| GSM8K | 54.4% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1359 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 67.8% | — |
| BoolQ | 89% | — |
| MMLU | 70.6% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 64.2% | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Falcon-180B: 25.3 (#281), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1000 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1372 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1312 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1338 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1356 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Falcon-180B: 53.6 (#281), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1047 | 1334 |
Long Context Not comparable
Falcon-180B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Falcon-180B: 29.3 (#290), Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)
| Benchmark | Falcon-180B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1054 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1089 | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1013 | 1342 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Falcon-180B better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 31.8 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Falcon-180B and Trinity Large Thinking share?
6 benchmarks have published results for both models. Falcon-180B has 16 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.