# Muse Glimmer vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/muse-glimmer-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Glimmer scores higher in 7 categories and Trinity Large Thinking in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Glimmer leads 25.7 to 16.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 44.9% for Muse Glimmer and 36.1% for Trinity Large Thinking.

## Snapshot

| | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 41.7 | 38.6 |
| Rank | 131 | 185 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Muse Glimmer: 40.4 (#142)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1355 | 1238 |
| SciCode | 44.9% | 36.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1416 | 1381 |

## Reasoning

- Muse Glimmer: 25.7 (#144)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 2.6% | 0.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1396 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |

## Math

- Muse Glimmer: 38.8 (#125)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1417 | 1366 |

## Knowledge

- Muse Glimmer: 38.5 (#143)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1360 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |

## Multilingual

- Muse Glimmer: 50.5 (#122)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1384 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1412 | 1373 |
| LMArena Russian | 1390 | 1337 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1357 |

## Instruction Following

- Muse Glimmer: 72.6 (#135)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1375 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#129)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1382 | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Muse Glimmer: 57.5 (#126)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1389 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1339 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1399 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Muse Glimmer better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Muse Glimmer or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Muse Glimmer scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.4 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Muse Glimmer and Trinity Large Thinking share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Glimmer has 15 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.