# Olmo 7b Instruct vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/olmo-7b-instruct-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 10

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Olmo 7b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Trinity Large Thinking in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 25.8.

## Snapshot

| | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 30.3 | 38.6 |
| Rank | 295 | 185 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1016 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |

## Reasoning

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 993 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |

## Math

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1018 | 1366 |

## Knowledge

- Olmo 7b Instruct: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1360 |

## Multilingual

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 977 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1014 | 1373 |
| LMArena Russian | 947 | 1337 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena German | — | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1357 |

## Instruction Following

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 978 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Olmo 7b Instruct: —
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

| Benchmark | Olmo 7b Instruct | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1032 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 990 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1007 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Olmo 7b Instruct better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Olmo 7b Instruct or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Olmo 7b Instruct and Trinity Large Thinking share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Olmo 7b Instruct has 10 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.