# Codestral vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/codestral-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in coding, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 33.8 to 26.9.
- Trinity Large Thinking is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for Codestral.
- Trinity Large Thinking accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 256K.

## Snapshot

| | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 30.1 | 38.1 |
| Rank | 287 | 180 |
| Context | 256K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $0.30 | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | $0.90 | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Codestral: 26.9 (#316)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 11.1% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 41.8% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1381 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 137.78 | — |
| HumanEval+ | 73.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 61.9% | — |

## Reasoning

- Codestral: 19.1 (#244)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 32.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1350 |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |

## Math

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1366 |

## Knowledge

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1359 |

## Multilingual

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)

| Benchmark | Codestral | 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

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Codestral: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)

| Benchmark | Codestral | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Codestral better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.1 to 30.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Codestral or Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Codestral lists at $0.30 and $0.90.

### Is Codestral or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.8 versus 26.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do Codestral and Trinity Large Thinking share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Codestral has 7 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.