Model comparison
Trinity Large Thinking vs Wizardlm 13b
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Arcee AI
MicrosoftSummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Trinity Large Thinking scores higher in 6 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 30.5.
Side by side
| Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 80K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244), Wizardlm 13b: 30.1 (#298)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1381 | 1035 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1238 | — |
| SciCode | 36.1% | — |
Reasoning Wizardlm 13b leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298), Wizardlm 13b: 19.4 (#259)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1350 | 1018 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 16.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 41.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 15.6% | — |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149), Wizardlm 13b: 30.2 (#238)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1366 | 1017 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113), Wizardlm 13b: —
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1360 | — |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160), Wizardlm 13b: 27.1 (#277)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1325 | 1034 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1023 |
| LMArena French | 1374 | — |
| LMArena German | 1356 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1357 | — |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162), Wizardlm 13b: 53.5 (#285)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1334 | 1048 |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144), Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#273)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1355 | 1054 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158), Wizardlm 13b: 30.5 (#287)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1077 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1320 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1047 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Wizardlm 13b?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Trinity Large Thinking or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Trinity Large Thinking and Wizardlm 13b share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Trinity Large Thinking has 24 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.