Trinity Large Preview vs GLM-4.7-FlashX vs DeepSeek OCR 2
Too close to call on our weighted score (Trinity Large Preview 34, GLM-4.7-FlashX 34, DeepSeek OCR 2 15). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Arcee AITrinity Large Preview
34/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context524K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7-FlashX
34/100- ECI—
- Price$0.07 / $0.40
- Context200K
DeepSeekDeepSeek OCR 2
15/100- ECI—
- Price$0.89 / $1.47
- Context8K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Trinity Large Preview 34/100, GLM-4.7-FlashX 34/100, DeepSeek OCR 2 15/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.7-FlashX on price and Trinity Large Preview for long inputs. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceGLM-4.7-FlashXGLM-4.7-FlashX $0.152 · DeepSeek OCR 2 $1.03 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Trinity Large Preview unpriced
- Longest contextTrinity Large PreviewTrinity Large Preview 524,288 · GLM-4.7-FlashX 200,000 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsDeepSeek OCR 2Trinity Large Preview: Text · GLM-4.7-FlashX: Text · DeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Trinity Large Preview | GLM-4.7-FlashX | DeepSeek OCR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 25 | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 40% | 49 | 32 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 34/100 | 34/100 | 15/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Trinity Large PreviewArcee AI | GLM-4.7-FlashXZ.ai (Zhipu) | DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | $0.07 (best) | $0.89 |
| Output | — | $0.40 (best) | $1.47 |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.152 (best) | $1.03 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Official Z.AI API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 524,288 tokens (best) | 200,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | Open | Open |
| API model ID | — | glm-4.7-flashx | — |
| API providers | 1 | 8 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Jan 27, 2026 | Jan 19, 2026 | Jan 27, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Trinity Large Preview—
- GLM-4.7-FlashX$1.50
- DeepSeek OCR 2$11.83
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Trinity Large Preview, GLM-4.7-FlashX or DeepSeek OCR 2?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Trinity Large Preview 34/100, GLM-4.7-FlashX 34/100, DeepSeek OCR 2 15/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: GLM-4.7-FlashX on price and Trinity Large Preview for long inputs. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Preview, GLM-4.7-FlashX or DeepSeek OCR 2?
GLM-4.7-FlashX is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). DeepSeek OCR 2 costs $0.89 input / $1.47 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.152 per million tokens for GLM-4.7-FlashX versus $1.03 for DeepSeek OCR 2 (6.8× as much). Trinity Large Preview has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Trinity Large Preview has not been scored yet, GLM-4.7-FlashX has not been scored yet and DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Large Preview, GLM-4.7-FlashX and DeepSeek OCR 2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Trinity Large Preview has the largest context window at 524,288 tokens, against 200,000 for GLM-4.7-FlashX and 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: Trinity Large Preview up to 262,144, GLM-4.7-FlashX up to 131,072, DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Trinity Large Preview accepts text; GLM-4.7-FlashX accepts text; DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images. DeepSeek OCR 2 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (OpenMDW-1.1), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Trinity Large Preview is the newest, released Jan 27, 2026. DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026; GLM-4.7-FlashX came out Jan 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7-FlashX Apr 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.
