# Qwen1.5 4b Chat vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen1-5-4b-chat-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen1.5 4b Chat 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 23.8.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 28.8 | 38.6 |
| Rank | 322 | 185 |
| Context | — | 262K |
| Input $/M | — | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 999 | 1381 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1238 |
| SciCode | — | 36.1% |

## Reasoning

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 976 | 1350 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 16.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |

## Math

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1026 | 1366 |

## Knowledge

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 980 | 1360 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |

## Multilingual

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 979 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1024 | 1373 |
| LMArena German | 902 | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | 952 | 1337 |
| LMArena French | — | 1374 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1357 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 978 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 988 | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

| Benchmark | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 997 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 969 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 977 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Qwen1.5 4b Chat or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen1.5 4b Chat and Trinity Large Thinking share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.