Model Comparison
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Trinity Large Thinking
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Alibaba, Arcee AI
Recommended Pick
ArTrinity Large Thinking6 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Lowest Price
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Trinity Large Thinking
38.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Trinity Large Thinking.
Reasoning gap
Trinity Large Thinking leads Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning) by 7.0 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Trinity Large Thinking wins 6 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Trinity Large Thinking
Arcee AI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Ar Trinity Large Thinking |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.23/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.88/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.40/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Arcee AI |
| Release Date | Apr 28, 2025 | Apr 1, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 193.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 721ms |
| Latency | — | 11073ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 31.2 | 38.1 |
| Intelligence | 6.8 | 24.5 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 39.8% | 75.2% |
| MMLU Pro | 58.6% | — |
| HLE | 3.7% | 14.7% |
| LiveCodeBench | 23.3% | — |
| MATH 500 | 84.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 21.3% | — |
| SciCode | 16.7% | 36.1% |
| LCR | — | 33.0% |
| IFBench | — | 56.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 90.1% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 22.7% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Trinity Large Thinking has the strongest reasoning profile with a 38.1 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen3 4B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Trinity Large Thinking
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
