# Trinity Large Thinking vs Wizardlm 13b

> Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

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

## Summary

- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Trinity Large Thinking scores higher in 6 categories and Wizardlm 13b in 1 category; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 53.8 to 30.5.

## Snapshot

| | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | Microsoft |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 185 | 274 |
| Context | 262K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.80 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.1 (#298)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1381 | 1035 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1238 | — |
| SciCode | 36.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298)
- Wizardlm 13b: 19.4 (#259)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1350 | 1018 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 16.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 41.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 15.6% | — |

## Math

- Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.2 (#238)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1366 | 1017 |

## Knowledge

- Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113)
- Wizardlm 13b: —

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1360 | — |

## Multilingual

- Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160)
- Wizardlm 13b: 27.1 (#277)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1325 | 1034 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1023 |
| LMArena French | 1374 | — |
| LMArena German | 1356 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1311 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1337 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1357 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162)
- Wizardlm 13b: 53.5 (#285)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1334 | 1048 |

## Long Context

- Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144)
- Wizardlm 13b: 32.0 (#273)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1355 | 1054 |

## Writing & Preference

- Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158)
- Wizardlm 13b: 30.5 (#287)

| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Wizardlm 13b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1077 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1320 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1047 |

## FAQ

### Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Wizardlm 13b?

Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Trinity Large Thinking or Wizardlm 13b better for coding?

Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Trinity Large Thinking and Wizardlm 13b share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Trinity Large Thinking has 24 scored results on Noometry and Wizardlm 13b has 10.