Model comparison
OLMo 2 Furious 13B vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Arcee AISummary
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 40.9 to 18.3.
Side by side
| OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 29.7 | 38.6 |
| Released | 2024-12-31 | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 12 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 28.6 (#313), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1381 |
Reasoning Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 15.5 (#314), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 16.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1350 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 20.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| LiveBench | 22.1% | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 23.1 (#273), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 15.6% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 13.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1366 |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 18.3 (#283), Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 31% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 31.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1360 |
Multilingual Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1373 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1357 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 60.9 (#248), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 60.6% | — |
| IFEval | 73% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1334 |
Long Context Not comparable
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
OLMo 2 Furious 13B: 42.9 (#230), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | OLMo 2 Furious 13B | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1320 |
| WildBench | 68.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1342 |
| LiveBench Language | 11.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is OLMo 2 Furious 13B or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do OLMo 2 Furious 13B and Trinity Large Thinking share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. OLMo 2 Furious 13B has 12 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.