Model comparison
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Google
Arcee AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 7 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 37.6 to 25.8.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2024-02-15 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 45 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 34.2 (#241), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1294 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| WeirdML | 22.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 43.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 57.5% | — |
| CadEval | 34% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 79.3% | — |
| MBPP+ | 74.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 17.9 (#145), Trinity Large Thinking: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 3.4% | — |
| Cybench | 7.5% | — |
| BALROG | 21% | — |
Reasoning Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 12.3 (#338), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1296 | 1350 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0.8% | — |
| SimpleBench | 27.1% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| DTBench | 59% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 89.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 131.73 | — |
| ForecastBench | 58.4 | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 25.8 (#266), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1315 | 1366 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 23.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 36.4% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70.4% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 29.4 (#239), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1279 | 1360 |
| GPQA Diamond | 57.2% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 4.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 13.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 53.4% | — |
| MMLU | 86.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 36.8 (#77), Trinity Large Thinking: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1161 | — |
| Video-MME | 75% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 45.3 (#174), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1312 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1331 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1302 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1286 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1292 | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | 1298 | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | 1320 | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1311 | 1357 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 68.6 (#185), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1297 | 1334 |
| IFEval | 83.7% | — |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 39.8 (#169), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1308 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024): 52.4 (#172), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1319 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1333 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1296 | 1342 |
| WildBench | 81.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (34.2 vs 34.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) and Trinity Large Thinking share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 1.5 Pro (May 2024) has 45 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.