# Mercury vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Mercury and Trinity Large Thinking score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.3 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 2 categories and Trinity Large Thinking in 4 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 54.0 to 46.2.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 38.1 |
| Rank | 192 | 180 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 33.8 (#238)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1323 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |

## Reasoning

- Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.3 (#298)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1350 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |

## Math

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

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

## Knowledge

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

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

## Multilingual

- Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.4 (#155)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1259 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1372 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1312 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1338 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1356 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.7 (#157)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1238 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.2 (#139)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1264 | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 54.0 (#152)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1321 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1283 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Mercury and Trinity Large Thinking score almost the same on the Noometry Index (37.3 vs 38.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

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

Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

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

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.