ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mercury Edit 2 vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Trinity Large Thinking

Trinity Large Thinking comes out ahead, 55 to 44 and 35 on our weighted score.

  1. Inception

    Mercury Edit 2

    Released Mar 30, 2026

    35/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.75
    • Context32K
  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed

    Released Jun 12, 2026

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.90 / $8.00
    • Context262K
  3. Our pick

    Arcee AI

    Trinity Large Thinking

    Released Apr 1, 2026Beta

    55/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.80
    • Context524K
01 — Verdict

Trinity Large Thinking is our pick

Trinity Large Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (44) and Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on context window. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed wins on inputs & features. 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 priceMercury Edit 2Mercury Edit 2 $0.375 · Trinity Large Thinking $0.388 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed $3.42 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextTrinity Large ThinkingTrinity Large Thinking 524,288 · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed 262,144 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMercury Edit 2: Text · Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed: Text, Images, Video · Trinity Large Thinking: Text
  • Self-hostingKimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Trinity Large ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMercury Edit 2Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedTrinity Large Thinking
Price50%702569
Inputs & features30%08035
Context window20%03749
Overall100%35/10044/10055/100

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.

Mercury Edit 2 vs Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed vs Trinity Large Thinking specifications side by side
SpecificationMercury Edit 2InceptionKimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AITrinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25 (best)$1.90$0.25 (best)
Output$0.75 (best)$8.00$0.80
Cached input$0.025 (best)—$0.06
Blended (3:1)$0.375 (best)$3.42$0.388
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Inception APIMedian of 11 providersOfficial Arcee API
Limits
Context window32,000 tokens262,144 tokens524,288 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens262,144 tokens (best)262,144 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoYesNo
ReasoningNoYesYes
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenOpenOpenMDW-1.1
API model IDmercury-edit-2—trinity-large-thinking
API providers111 (best)6
ReleasedMar 30, 2026Jun 12, 2026Apr 1, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025—
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.

  • Mercury Edit 2$4.00
  • Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed$35.00
  • Trinity Large Thinking$4.10
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mercury Edit 2, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Trinity Large Thinking?

Trinity Large Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 55/100 against Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (44) and Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on context window. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed wins on inputs & features. 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, Mercury Edit 2, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed or Trinity Large Thinking?

Mercury Edit 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). Trinity Large Thinking costs $0.25 input / $0.80 output per million tokens (official Arcee API price); Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed costs $1.90 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.375 per million tokens for Mercury Edit 2 versus $0.388 for Trinity Large Thinking (1× as much) and $3.42 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed (9.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed has not been scored yet and Trinity Large Thinking has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury Edit 2, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Trinity Large Thinking yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Mercury Edit 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Trinity Large Thinking has the largest context window at 524,288 tokens, against 262,144 for Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2. Maximum output per response: Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192, Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed up to 262,144, Trinity Large Thinking up to 262,144 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mercury Edit 2 accepts text; Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed accepts text, images and video; Trinity Large Thinking accepts text. Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed and Trinity Large Thinking publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed is the newest, released Jun 12, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking came out Apr 1, 2026; Mercury Edit 2 came out Mar 30, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Kimi K2.7 Code Highspeed Jan 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 Oct 4, 2026.