Model comparison

Mistral Small 3.2 vs Trinity Large Thinking

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Small 3.2 costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Trinity Large Thinking's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 0 shared benchmarks.

Mistral Small 3.2

Mistral AI

30.8

Rank #271 Confirmed

Trinity Large Thinking

Arcee AI

38.1

Rank #180 Confirmed

Summary

The widest gap is in knowledge, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 40.3 to 26.8.
Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper at $0.0938 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.80 for Trinity Large Thinking.
Trinity Large Thinking accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 256K.

Side by side

Mistral Small 3.2 and Trinity Large Thinking specifications
	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
Provider	Mistral AI	Arcee AI
Noometry Index	30.8	38.1
Released	2025-06-20	2026-04-01
Weights	Open	Open
Context window	256K	262K
Max output	16K	80K
Input $ / M tokens	$0.0938	$0.25
Output $ / M tokens	$0.25	$0.80
Results tracked	6	24

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena WebDev	—	1238
SciCode	—	36.1%
LMArena Coding	—	1381

Reasoning Mistral Small 3.2 leads

Mistral Small 3.2: 17.5 (#282), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
Kagi LLM Benchmark	40.4%	—
NYT Connections (extended)	—	16.5%
CritPt	—	0.9%
Chess Puzzles	1%	—
Thematic Generalization	—	41.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts	—	1350
Surface Evolver Bench	—	15.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index	131.73	—

Math Trinity Large Thinking leads

Mistral Small 3.2: 24.9 (#251), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	30.3%	—
LMArena Math	—	1366

Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads

Mistral Small 3.2: 26.8 (#249), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
GPQA Diamond	49.1%	—
Vectara Hallucination Rate	—	6.9%
LMArena Expert	—	1359

Multilingual Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Non-English	—	1325
LMArena Chinese	—	1372
LMArena French	—	1374
LMArena German	—	1356
LMArena Japanese	—	1312
LMArena Korean	—	1304
LMArena Russian	—	1338
LMArena Spanish	—	1356

Instruction Following Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Instruction Following	—	1334

Long Context Not comparable

Mistral Small 3.2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Longer Query	—	1355

Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads

Mistral Small 3.2: 45.1 (#219), Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Mistral Small 3.2	Trinity Large Thinking
LMArena Text	—	1340
LMArena Creative Writing	—	1321
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1255	—
LMArena Multi-Turn	—	1342

Frequently asked questions

Is Mistral Small 3.2 better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Which is cheaper, Mistral Small 3.2 or Trinity Large Thinking?

Mistral Small 3.2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.0938 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Trinity Large Thinking lists at $0.25 and $0.80.

Which has the bigger context window?

Trinity Large Thinking does, with 262K tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Mistral Small 3.2 and Trinity Large Thinking share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mistral Small 3.2 has 6 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.