Trinity Large Thinking vs MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Mercury Edit 2
Too close to call on our weighted score (Trinity Large Thinking 55, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54, Mercury Edit 2 35). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Arcee AITrinity Large Thinking
55/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.80
- Context524K
XiaomiMiMo-V2.5-Pro
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.435 / $0.87
- Context1.05M
InceptionMercury Edit 2
35/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context32K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Trinity Large Thinking 55/100, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54/100, Mercury Edit 2 35/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury Edit 2 on price and MiMo-V2.5-Pro for long inputs. 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 · MiMo-V2.5-Pro $0.544 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.5-ProMiMo-V2.5-Pro 1,048,576 · Trinity Large Thinking 524,288 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsTrinity Large Thinking: Text · MiMo-V2.5-Pro: Text · Mercury Edit 2: Text
- Self-hostingTrinity Large Thinking and MiMo-V2.5-ProPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
| Measure | Weight | Trinity Large Thinking | MiMo-V2.5-Pro | Mercury Edit 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 69 | 62 | 70 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 | 0 |
| Context window | 20% | 49 | 61 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 55/100 | 54/100 | 35/100 |
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 | Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI | MiMo-V2.5-ProXiaomi | Mercury Edit 2Inception |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 (best) | $0.435 | $0.25 (best) |
| Output | $0.80 | $0.87 | $0.75 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.06 | $0.0036 (best) | $0.025 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.388 | $0.544 | $0.375 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Arcee API | Official Xiaomi API | Official Inception API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 524,288 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | trinity-large-thinking | mimo-v2.5-pro | mercury-edit-2 |
| API providers | 6 | 20 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Apr 1, 2026 | Apr 22, 2026 | Mar 30, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Dec 2024 | — |
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 Thinking$4.10
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro$6.09
- Mercury Edit 2$4.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Trinity Large Thinking, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Mercury Edit 2?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Trinity Large Thinking 55/100, MiMo-V2.5-Pro 54/100, Mercury Edit 2 35/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury Edit 2 on price and MiMo-V2.5-Pro for long inputs. 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, Trinity Large Thinking, MiMo-V2.5-Pro or Mercury Edit 2?
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); MiMo-V2.5-Pro costs $0.435 input / $0.87 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price). 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 $0.544 for MiMo-V2.5-Pro (1.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Trinity Large Thinking has not been scored yet, MiMo-V2.5-Pro has not been scored yet and Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Large Thinking, MiMo-V2.5-Pro and Mercury Edit 2 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?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 524,288 for Trinity Large Thinking and 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2. Maximum output per response: Trinity Large Thinking up to 262,144, MiMo-V2.5-Pro up to 131,072, Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Trinity Large Thinking accepts text; MiMo-V2.5-Pro accepts text; Mercury Edit 2 accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Trinity Large Thinking and MiMo-V2.5-Pro publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.5-Pro is the newest, released Apr 22, 2026. Trinity Large Thinking came out Apr 1, 2026; Mercury Edit 2 came out Mar 30, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: MiMo-V2.5-Pro Dec 2024.
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.
Related comparisons
- Trinity Large Thinking vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIA
- Trinity Large Thinking vs Step 3.7 FlashStepFun
- Trinity Large Thinking vs Seed 1.8ByteDance Seed
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteGoogle
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIA
- MiMo-V2.5-Pro vs MiniMax-M2 HerMiniMax
