# Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Gemini 2.0 Pro and Trinity Large Thinking score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemini-2-0-pro-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in long context, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 41.2 to 29.1.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 38.1 |
| Rank | 171 | 180 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1381 |

## Reasoning

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1350 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |

## Math

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.9 (#149)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1366 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.3 (#107)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1359 |

## Multilingual

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | 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

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)

| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1342 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Gemini 2.0 Pro and Trinity Large Thinking score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.6 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

### Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Trinity Large Thinking share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.