Skip to content

Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3 8B

Mercury 2.5

Inception

61#208
vs
Qwen3 8B

Alibaba

61#210
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalMercury 2.5DeltaQwen3 8B
Capabilities
67
--
67
Benchmarks
60
--
60
Pricing
100
+0
100
Context window size
86
+5
81
Recency
100
+58
42
Output Capacity
77
+14
63
Overall Result
4 wins
of 6
0 wins
Mercury 2.5 wins 4 of 6 signals

Score History

Score History (30 data points)
Mercury 2.5Qwen3 8B
Mercury 2.5

61.3

current score

Leader

Mercury 2.5

right now

Qwen3 8B

61

current score

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

Mercury 2.5

Inception

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

Qwen3 8B

Alibaba

Per request$0.000344
Daily$1.15
Monthly$34.45
Annual$413.40

Mercury 2.5 saves you $22.95/month

That's $275.40/year compared to Qwen3 8B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.

67% cheaper
Choose Mercury 2.5 for cost optimization

Mercury 2.5 pricing:
Input:$0.04/M tokens
Output:$0.15/M tokens
Qwen3 8B pricing:
Input:$0.12/M tokens
Output:$0.45/M tokens
Winner
Mercury 2.5

Inception

61

Composite Score

Qwen3 8B

Alibaba

61

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricMercury 2.5Qwen3 8BWinner
Overall Score
61
61
Mercury 2.5
Rank#208#210
Mercury 2.5
Quality Rank#208#210
Mercury 2.5
Adoption Rank#208#210
Mercury 2.5
Parameters--8B--
Context Window260K131K
Mercury 2.5
Pricing$0.04/$0.15/M$0.12/$0.45/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
67
67
Mercury 2.5
Benchmarks
60
60
Mercury 2.5
Pricing
100
100
Mercury 2.5
Context window size
86
81
Mercury 2.5
Recency
100
42
Mercury 2.5
Output Capacity
77
63
Mercury 2.5
Benchmark Head-to-Head(1 benchmarks)
Mercury 2.5: 01 tiesQwen3 8B: 0
Mercury 2.5
Qwen3 8B
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 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
Qwen3 8BCompetitive

Scores 61/100 (rank #210), placing it in the top 28% 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 2.5 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

Choose Qwen3 8B when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
  • Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Cost-Performance Analysis
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
Qwen3 8B
Input cost$0.12/M tokens
Output cost$0.45/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.009
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$8.58

Mercury 2.5 offers 67% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $2.85/month with Mercury 2.5 vs $8.58/month with Qwen3 8B - a $5.73 monthly difference.

Latency & Speed
Mercury 2.5Faster
Speed score0/100
Qwen3 8B
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 2.5

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 2.5

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 2.5 and Qwen3 8B 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.

Mercury 2.5
Recommended

by Inception

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 67% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • 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

by Alibaba

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityMercury 2.5Qwen3 8B
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 2.5

Inception

Best Value
$0.2520
estimated monthly cost

Qwen3 8B

Alibaba

$0.7566
estimated monthly cost

Mercury 2.5 saves you $0.5046/month

That's 67% cheaper than Qwen3 8B 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 2.5Qwen3 8B
Context Window260K131K
Max Output Tokens65,5368,192
Open SourceNoYes
CreatedSep 8, 2026Apr 28, 2025
Last updated: 32m ago

Related comparisons

Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3 8B (2026) | LM Market Cap