ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Trinity Mini vs LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) comes out ahead, 72 to 65 and 58 on our weighted score, though LFM2 24B A2B is 25% cheaper per token.

  1. Arcee AI

    Trinity Mini

    Released Dec 1, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.045 / $0.15
    • Context131K
  2. Liquid AI

    LFM2 24B A2B

    Released Feb 24, 2026

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

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    72/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.022 / $0.215
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) is our pick

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Trinity Mini (65) 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 · Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) $0.07 · Trinity Mini $0.071 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) 262,144 · Trinity Mini 131,072 · LFM2 24B A2B 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Trinity Mini: Text · LFM2 24B A2B: Text · Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud): Text, Images
  • Self-hostingTrinity Mini and LFM2 24B A2BPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1 and LFM Open License v1.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightTrinity MiniLFM2 24B A2BQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)
Price50%100100100
Inputs & features30%352550
Context window20%25037
Overall100%65/10058/10072/100

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.

Trinity Mini vs LFM2 24B A2B vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) specifications side by side
SpecificationTrinity MiniArcee AILFM2 24B A2BLiquid AIQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.045$0.03$0.022 (best)
Output$0.15$0.12 (best)$0.215
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.071$0.052 (best)$0.07
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens32,768 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenMDW-1.1OpenLFM Open License v1.0Proprietary
API model ID———
API providers111
ReleasedDec 1, 2025Feb 24, 2026Oct 15, 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.

  • Trinity Mini$0.75
  • LFM2 24B A2B$0.54
  • Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)$0.65
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Trinity Mini, LFM2 24B A2B or Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)?

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Trinity Mini (65) 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, Trinity Mini, LFM2 24B A2B or Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)?

LFM2 24B A2B is cheaper at $0.03 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) costs $0.022 input / $0.215 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); 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 $0.07 for Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) (1.3× 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. Trinity Mini has not been scored yet, LFM2 24B A2B has not been scored yet and Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Mini, LFM2 24B A2B and Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Trinity Mini and 32,768 for LFM2 24B A2B. Maximum output per response: Trinity Mini up to 131,072, LFM2 24B A2B up to 32,768, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Trinity Mini accepts text; LFM2 24B A2B accepts text; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) accepts text and images. Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Trinity Mini and LFM2 24B A2B publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1 and LFM Open License v1.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) is proprietary.

Which is newer?

LFM2 24B A2B is the newest, released Feb 24, 2026. Trinity Mini came out Dec 1, 2025; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) came out Oct 15, 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.