Skip to content

Mercury 2 vs Mercury 2.5

Mercury 2

Inception

61#209
vs
Mercury 2.5

Inception

61#208
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalMercury 2DeltaMercury 2.5
Capabilities
67
--
67
Benchmarks
60
--
60
Pricing
99
-1
100
Context window size
81
-5
86
Recency
98
-2
100
Output Capacity
75
-2
77
Overall Result
0 wins
of 6
4 wins
Mercury 2.5 wins 4 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (30 data points)
Mercury 2Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2

61

current score

Leader

Mercury 2.5

right now

Mercury 2.5

61.3

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Mercury 2

Inception

Per request$0.000625
Daily$2.08
Monthly$62.50
Annual$750.00

Mercury 2.5

Inception

Best Value
Per request$0.000115
Daily$0.38
Monthly$11.50
Annual$138.00

Mercury 2.5 saves you $51.00/month

That's $612.00/year compared to Mercury 2 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

82% cheaper
Choose Mercury 2.5 for cost optimization

Mercury 2 pricing:
Input:$0.25/M tokens
Output:$0.75/M tokens
Mercury 2.5 pricing:
Input:$0.04/M tokens
Output:$0.15/M tokens
Mercury 2

Inception

61

Composite Score

Winner
Mercury 2.5

Inception

61

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricMercury 2Mercury 2.5Winner
Overall Score
61
61
Mercury 2.5
Rank#209#208
Mercury 2.5
Quality Rank#209#208
Mercury 2.5
Adoption Rank#209#208
Mercury 2.5
Parameters------
Context Window128K260K
Mercury 2.5
Pricing$0.25/$0.75/M$0.04/$0.15/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
67
67
Mercury 2
Benchmarks
60
60
Mercury 2
Pricing
99
100
Mercury 2.5
Context window size
81
86
Mercury 2.5
Recency
98
100
Mercury 2.5
Output Capacity
75
77
Mercury 2.5
Benchmark Head-to-Head(1 benchmarks)
Mercury 2: 01 tiesMercury 2.5: 0
Mercury 2
Mercury 2.5
Normalized 0-100%
Arena Elo
13471347
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Mercury 2Competitive

Scores 61/100 (rank #209), placing it in the top 28% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Mercury 2.5Competitive

Scores 61/100 (rank #208), placing it in the top 29% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Mercury 2 when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving

Choose Mercury 2.5 when you need:

  • High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
  • Processing long documents or large codebases (260K token context)
  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Cost-Performance Analysis
Mercury 2
Input cost$0.25/M tokens
Output cost$0.75/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.016
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$15.00
Mercury 2.5Best Value
Input cost$0.04/M tokens
Output cost$0.15/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.003
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$2.85

Mercury 2.5 offers 81% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $2.85/month with Mercury 2.5 vs $15.00/month with Mercury 2 - a $12.15 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Mercury 2Faster
Speed score0/100
Mercury 2.5
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Mercury 2

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Mercury 2.5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Mercury 2

Long document analysis

Larger context window (260K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Mercury 2.5

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.15/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Mercury 2.5

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (61/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Mercury 2.5
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Mercury 2.5

Mercury 2 and Mercury 2.5 are extremely close in overall performance (only 0.29999999999999716 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.

by Inception

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
Mercury 2.5
Recommended

by Inception

  • Choose for Cost - 81% lower pricing; better value at scale
Capability Comparison
CapabilityMercury 2Mercury 2.5
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Mercury 2

Inception

$1.35
estimated monthly cost

Mercury 2.5

Inception

Best Value
$0.2520
estimated monthly cost

Mercury 2.5 saves you $1.10/month

That's 81% cheaper than Mercury 2 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterMercury 2Mercury 2.5
Context Window128K260K
Max Output Tokens50,00065,536
Open SourceNoNo
CreatedMar 4, 2026Sep 8, 2026
Last updated: 29m ago

Related comparisons

Mercury 2 vs Mercury 2.5 (2026) | LM Market Cap