Trinity Mini vs Claude Haiku 4.5
Trinity Mini comes out ahead, 65 to 47 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Arcee AITrinity Mini
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
AnthropicClaude Haiku 4.5
47/100- ECI142.2
- Price$1.00 / $5.00
- Context200K
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 Claude Haiku 4.5 (47). It leads on price. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins 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 priceTrinity MiniTrinity Mini $0.071 · Claude Haiku 4.5 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextClaude Haiku 4.5Claude Haiku 4.5 200,000 · Trinity Mini 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Haiku 4.5Trinity Mini: Text · Claude Haiku 4.5: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingTrinity MiniPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
| Measure | Weight | Trinity Mini | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 34 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 25 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 47/100 |
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 MiniArcee AI | Claude Haiku 4.5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 142.2 |
| ECI rank | — | #102 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 71.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 66.7% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 13.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.045 (best) | $1.00 |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | $5.00 |
| Cached input | — | $0.10 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.071 (best) | $2.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Anthropic API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 200,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 64,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | claude-haiku-4-5 |
| API providers | 1 | 48 (best) |
| Released | Dec 1, 2025 | Oct 15, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Feb 28, 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 Mini$0.75
- Claude Haiku 4.5$20.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Trinity Mini or Claude Haiku 4.5?
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Claude Haiku 4.5 (47). It leads on price. Claude Haiku 4.5 wins 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, Trinity Mini or Claude Haiku 4.5?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Claude Haiku 4.5 costs $1.00 input / $5.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini versus $2.00 for Claude Haiku 4.5 (28× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Trinity Mini has not been scored yet and Claude Haiku 4.5 has an ECI of 142.2.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Mini and Claude Haiku 4.5 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?
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Trinity Mini. Maximum output per response: Trinity Mini up to 131,072, Claude Haiku 4.5 up to 64,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Trinity Mini accepts text; Claude Haiku 4.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Claude Haiku 4.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Trinity Mini publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Claude Haiku 4.5 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Trinity Mini is the newest, released Dec 1, 2025. Claude Haiku 4.5 came out Oct 15, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Haiku 4.5 Feb 28, 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 Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Three-way comparison
- Trinity Mini vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)
- Trinity Mini vs AutoGLM Phone 9B MultilingualZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Trinity Mini vs Ministral 3 3BMistral AI
- Trinity Mini vs Baichuan M2 32BBaichuan
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 143.7
- Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Mistral Medium 3.5Mistral AI · ECI 141.5
