Apertus 8B vs Trinity Mini
Trinity Mini comes out ahead, 65 to 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Swiss AI
Apertus 8B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context66K
- Our pick
Arcee AITrinity Mini
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Trinity Mini is our pick
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Apertus 8B (54). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceTrinity MiniTrinity Mini $0.071 · Apertus 8B $0.125 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextTrinity MiniTrinity Mini 131,072 · Apertus 8B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 8B: Text · Trinity Mini: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 8B | Trinity Mini |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 54/100 | 65/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 8BSwiss AI | Trinity MiniArcee AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.045 (best) |
| Output | $0.20 | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.125 | $0.071 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Dec 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 8B$1.40
- Trinity Mini$0.75
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 8B or Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Apertus 8B (54). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 8B or Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Apertus 8B costs $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini versus $0.125 for Apertus 8B (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Apertus 8B has not been scored yet and Trinity Mini has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 8B and Trinity Mini yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Trinity Mini has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 65,536 for Apertus 8B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 8B up to 8,192, Trinity Mini up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 8B accepts text; Trinity Mini accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (Apache-2.0 and OpenMDW-1.1), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Trinity Mini is the newest, released Dec 1, 2025. Apertus 8B came out Sep 2, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 8B Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Granite-4.0-H-SmallThree-way comparison
- Apertus 8B vs Granite-4.0-H-SmallIBM
- Apertus 8B vs Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen)
- Apertus 8B vs ERNIE 4.5 21B A3BBaidu
- Apertus 8B vs Nemotron Nano 9B v2NVIDIA
- Trinity Mini vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)
- Trinity Mini vs AutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualZ.ai (Zhipu)
