Model comparison
Llama 3.1-405B vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Meta
Arcee AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-405B 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 34.9 to 17.3.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 30.4 | 38.1 |
| Released | 2024-07-23 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 42 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 32.7 (#257), Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1291 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| WeirdML | 21.4% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.1-405B: 20.9 (#131), Trinity Large Thinking: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 7.4% | — |
| Cybench | 7.5% | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Llama 3.1-405B: 16.4 (#293), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1270 | 1350 |
| SimpleBench | 23% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 45% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| DTBench | 61.4% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 82.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 128.76 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | — |
| HellaSwag | 89.2% | — |
| PIQA | 85.9% | — |
| WinoGrande | 89.2% | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 17.3 (#283), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1281 | 1366 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 9.7% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 24.9% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 49.8% | — |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 30.4 (#221), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1243 | 1359 |
| GPQA Diamond | 50.9% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 72.3% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.6% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 52.2% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 95.3% | — |
| MMLU | 84.5% | — |
| TriviaQA | 82.7% | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 40.9 (#209), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1248 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1242 | 1372 |
| LMArena French | 1278 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1252 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1208 | 1312 |
| LMArena Korean | 1184 | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | 1265 | 1338 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1259 | 1356 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 66.1 (#209), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1259 | 1334 |
| IFEval | 81.1% | — |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 38.4 (#192), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1266 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Llama 3.1-405B: 39.1 (#246), Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-405B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1284 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1262 | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1297 | 1342 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 870 | — |
| WildBench | 78.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1-405B better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.1-405B or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.8 versus 32.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-405B and Trinity Large Thinking share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-405B has 42 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.