# Qwen3.8 Max vs Trinity Large Thinking

> Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index. Trinity Large Thinking costs 7.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/qwen3-8-max-vs-trinity-large-thinking
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 21

## Summary

- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Qwen3.8 Max scores higher in 8 categories and Trinity Large Thinking in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 54.4 to 16.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 88.3% for Qwen3.8 Max and 16.5% for Trinity Large Thinking.
- Trinity Large Thinking is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.80 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Qwen3.8 Max.
- Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Trinity Large Thinking has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Alibaba (Qwen) | Arcee AI |
| Noometry Index | 56.8 | 38.6 |
| Rank | 22 | 185 |
| Context | 1M | 262K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | $6 | $0.80 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1674 | 1238 |
| SciCode | 53.2% | 36.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1502 | 1381 |
| DeepSWE | 57.5% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 17.8% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
- Trinity Large Thinking: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 63.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 55.1% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 23.2% | — |

## Reasoning

- Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.3% | 16.5% |
| CritPt | 20% | 0.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1496 | 1350 |
| Chess Puzzles | 40% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 41.6% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 38% | — |
| DTBench | 92% | — |
| LMCA | 46.2% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 15.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.41 | — |

## Math

- Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1499 | 1366 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 74.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 46.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 58% | — |

## Knowledge

- Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1507 | 1360 |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 47.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |

## Multimodal

- Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
- Trinity Large Thinking: —

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1314 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 20% | — |

## Multilingual

- Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1472 | 1325 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1538 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1503 | 1374 |
| LMArena German | 1483 | 1356 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1467 | 1311 |
| LMArena Korean | 1461 | 1306 |
| LMArena Russian | 1481 | 1337 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1492 | 1357 |

## Instruction Following

- Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1479 | 1334 |

## Long Context

- Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1489 | 1355 |

## Writing & Preference

- Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)

| Benchmark | Qwen3.8 Max | Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1483 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1479 | 1320 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1489 | 1342 |

## FAQ

### Is Qwen3.8 Max better than Trinity Large Thinking?

Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 38.6 on the Noometry Index. Trinity Large Thinking costs 7.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.8 Max's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Max or Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.80 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max lists at $2 and $6.

### Is Qwen3.8 Max or Trinity Large Thinking better for coding?

Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

### How many benchmarks do Qwen3.8 Max and Trinity Large Thinking share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3.8 Max has 39 scored results on Noometry and Trinity Large Thinking has 24.