Model comparison
Trinity Large Thinking vs Yi-34B
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Arcee AISummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Trinity Large Thinking scores higher in 7 categories and Yi-34B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Trinity Large Thinking leads 40.9 to 7.5.
Side by side
| Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Arcee AI | 01.AI |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 27.8 |
| Released | 2026-04-01 | 2023-11-02 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Max output | 80K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.80 | — |
| Results tracked | 24 | 23 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 34.1 (#244), Yi-34B: 32.3 (#274)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1381 | 1112 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1238 | — |
| SciCode | 36.1% | — |
Reasoning Yi-34B leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 16.9 (#298), Yi-34B: 21.2 (#226)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1350 | 1104 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 16.5% | — |
| CritPt | 0.9% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 41.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 15.6% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 71.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 117.39 |
Math Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 37.6 (#149), Yi-34B: 21.6 (#282)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1366 | 1114 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 5.1% |
| GSM8K | — | 76% |
Knowledge Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 40.9 (#113), Yi-34B: 7.5 (#309)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1360 | 1061 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 14.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| MMLU | — | 76.3% |
Multilingual Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 46.2 (#160), Yi-34B: 29.7 (#264)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1325 | 1079 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1176 |
| LMArena French | 1374 | 1081 |
| LMArena German | 1356 | 1042 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1311 | 993 |
| LMArena Korean | 1306 | 959 |
| LMArena Russian | 1337 | 1050 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1357 | 1070 |
Instruction Following Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 70.5 (#162), Yi-34B: 56.2 (#274)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1334 | 1091 |
Long Context Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 41.3 (#144), Yi-34B: 33.2 (#264)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1355 | 1094 |
Writing & Preference Trinity Large Thinking leads
Trinity Large Thinking: 53.8 (#158), Yi-34B: 34.1 (#273)
| Benchmark | Trinity Large Thinking | Yi-34B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1129 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1320 | 1108 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1342 | 1113 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Trinity Large Thinking better than Yi-34B?
Trinity Large Thinking is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 27.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Trinity Large Thinking or Yi-34B better for coding?
Trinity Large Thinking scores higher on coding benchmarks: 34.1 versus 32.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Trinity Large Thinking and Yi-34B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Trinity Large Thinking has 24 scored results on Noometry and Yi-34B has 23.