ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual vs LFM2 24B A2B vs Trinity Mini

Trinity Mini comes out ahead, 65 to 60 and 58 on our weighted score, though LFM2 24B A2B is 26% cheaper per token.

  1. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual

    Released Dec 10, 2025

    60/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.035 / $0.138
    • Context66K
  2. Liquid AI

    LFM2 24B A2B

    Released Feb 24, 2026

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.03 / $0.12
    • Context33K
  3. Our pick

    Arcee AI

    Trinity Mini

    Released Dec 1, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.045 / $0.15
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Trinity Mini is our pick

Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual (60) and LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on 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 priceLFM2 24B A2BLFM2 24B A2B $0.052 · AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual $0.061 · Trinity Mini $0.071 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextTrinity MiniTrinity Mini 131,072 · AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual 65,536 · LFM2 24B A2B 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsAutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualAutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual: Text, Images · LFM2 24B A2B: Text · Trinity Mini: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightAutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualLFM2 24B A2BTrinity Mini
Price50%100100100
Inputs & features30%252535
Context window20%12025
Overall100%60/10058/10065/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual vs LFM2 24B A2B vs Trinity Mini specifications side by side
SpecificationAutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualZ.ai (Zhipu)LFM2 24B A2BLiquid AITrinity MiniArcee AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.035$0.03 (best)$0.045
Output$0.138$0.12 (best)$0.15
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.061$0.052 (best)$0.071
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window65,536 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output65,536 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoYes
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenMITOpenLFM Open License v1.0OpenOpenMDW-1.1
API model ID———
API providers2 (best)11
ReleasedDec 10, 2025Feb 24, 2026Dec 1, 2025
Knowledge cutoff———
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual$0.626
  • LFM2 24B A2B$0.54
  • Trinity Mini$0.75
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual, LFM2 24B A2B or Trinity Mini?

Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual (60) and LFM2 24B A2B (58). It leads on 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, AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual, LFM2 24B A2B or Trinity Mini?

LFM2 24B A2B is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual costs $0.035 input / $0.138 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers); Trinity Mini costs $0.045 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.052 per million tokens for LFM2 24B A2B versus $0.061 for AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual (1.2× as much) and $0.071 for Trinity Mini (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual has not been scored yet, LFM2 24B A2B 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 AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual, LFM2 24B A2B and Trinity Mini yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Trinity Mini has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 65,536 for AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual and 32,768 for LFM2 24B A2B. Maximum output per response: AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual up to 65,536, LFM2 24B A2B up to 32,768, Trinity Mini up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual accepts text and images; LFM2 24B A2B accepts text; Trinity Mini accepts text. AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (MIT, LFM Open License v1.0 and OpenMDW-1.1), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

LFM2 24B A2B is the newest, released Feb 24, 2026. AutoGLM Phone 9B Multilingual came out Dec 10, 2025; Trinity Mini came out Dec 1, 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.