Model comparison
Gemini 1.0 Pro vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
Google
Arcee AISummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.0 Pro scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 37.6 to 9.3.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | |
| Noometry Index | 27.3 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2023-12-13 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 32.2 (#275), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1108 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| HumanEval+ | 55.5% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.4% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 17.1 (#296), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1109 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| DTBench | 45.9% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 117.04 | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 9.3 (#321), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1132 | 1366 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 11.2% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 15.6 (#291), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1059 | 1360 |
| GPQA Diamond | 34% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| MMLU | 70% | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 33.4 (#252), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1138 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1124 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1145 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1125 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1023 | 1311 |
| LMArena Russian | 1186 | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1119 | 1357 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1306 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 57.6 (#267), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1114 | 1334 |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 34.3 (#249), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1132 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.0 Pro: 36.0 (#264), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1149 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1131 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1139 | 1342 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.0 Pro better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 1.0 Pro or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 32.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.0 Pro and Trinity Large Thinking share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.0 Pro has 24 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.