Trinity Mini vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct comes out ahead, 72 to 65 on our weighted score, though Trinity Mini is 11% cheaper per token.
Arcee AITrinity Mini
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
- Our pick
MicrosoftPhi-4-multimodal-instruct
72/100- ECI—
- Price$0.07 / $0.11
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is our pick
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Trinity Mini (65). It leads on inputs & features. Trinity Mini wins on price. 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 · Phi-4-multimodal-instruct $0.08 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameTrinity Mini 131,072 · Phi-4-multimodal-instruct 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsPhi-4-multimodal-instructTrinity Mini: Text · Phi-4-multimodal-instruct: Text, Images, Audio
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Trinity Mini | Phi-4-multimodal-instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 98 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 25 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 72/100 |
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 | Phi-4-multimodal-instructMicrosoft |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.045 (best) | $0.07 |
| Output | $0.15 | $0.11 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.071 (best) | $0.08 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | OpenMIT |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Dec 1, 2025 | Feb 26, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jun 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 Mini$0.75
- Phi-4-multimodal-instruct$0.92
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Trinity Mini or Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Trinity Mini (65). It leads on inputs & features. Trinity Mini wins on price. 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Phi-4-multimodal-instruct costs $0.07 input / $0.11 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini versus $0.08 for Phi-4-multimodal-instruct (1.1× 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Mini and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct 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?
Trinity Mini and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: Trinity Mini up to 131,072, Phi-4-multimodal-instruct up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Trinity Mini accepts text; Phi-4-multimodal-instruct accepts text, images and audio. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (OpenMDW-1.1 and MIT), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Trinity Mini is the newest, released Dec 1, 2025. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct came out Feb 26, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Phi-4-multimodal-instruct Jun 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 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
- Phi-4-multimodal-instruct vs Command R7B ArabicCohere
- Phi-4-multimodal-instruct vs Reka Flash 3Reka AI
