# Gemma 1.1 2b IT vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-1-1-2b-it-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 14

## Summary

- They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 1.1 2b IT scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 25.1.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 29.3 | 38.6 |
| Rank | 313 | 185 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1034 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |
| HumanEval+ | 17.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 23.3% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | 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

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1047 | 1366 |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 970 | 1360 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 988 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1012 | 1373 |
| LMArena German | 944 | 1356 |
| LMArena Korean | 899 | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | 990 | 1337 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1357 |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 992 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1003 | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

| Benchmark | Gemma 1.1 2b IT | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1022 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 998 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 959 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Gemma 1.1 2b IT or Trinity Large Thinking 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 Gemma 1.1 2b IT and Trinity Large Thinking share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.