Model comparison
Palm 2 vs Trinity Large Thinking
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Google
Arcee AISummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Palm 2 scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 25.6.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | |
| Noometry Index | 30.0 | 38.6 |
| Released | — | 2026-04-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 262K |
| Max output | — | 80K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.80 |
| Results tracked | 10 | 24 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Palm 2: 29.0 (#311), Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 994 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
Reasoning Palm 2 leads
Palm 2: 19.1 (#271), Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1005 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Palm 2: 30.8 (#231), Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1049 | 1366 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Palm 2: —, Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1360 |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Palm 2: 20.9 (#295), Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 916 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 887 | 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
Palm 2: 51.0 (#296), Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1010 | 1334 |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Palm 2: 30.8 (#285), Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1010 | 1355 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Palm 2: 25.6 (#304), Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
| Benchmark | Palm 2 | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1027 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 991 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 994 | 1342 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Palm 2 better than Trinity Large Thinking?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Palm 2 or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 29.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Palm 2 and Trinity Large Thinking share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Palm 2 has 10 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.