Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Micro 1.0 vs Mercury 2

Mercury 2 leads Nova Micro 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.8 to 5.9, and Nova Micro 1.0 costs 5.4x less per output token ($0.14 vs $0.75 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 26 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Nova Micro 1.0 Replace Mercury 2
Nova Micro 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
0
Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
10.8
Output $/M
$0.75
26
vs boards won of 26 shared

Nova Micro 1.0 or Mercury 2: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Nova Micro 1.0 for output tokens 5.4x cheaper ($0.14 vs $0.75 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model ANova Micro 1.0AmazonNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMercury 2InceptionNot benchmarked1 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
26
Nova Micro 1.0 only
13
Mercury 2 only
16
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova Micro 1.0 not benchmarked, Mercury 2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 56.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Nova Micro 1.0 14.0% against Mercury 2 70.8%, 56.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Micro 1.0 $0.14 against Mercury 2 $0.75 per million output tokens, 5.4x apart.
Context window
Both take 128K tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Micro 1.0BarsMercury 2Ties
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Knowledge03
General013
All shared boards026
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1171Only Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured31.1Only Mercury 2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)14.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
SciCodeNot measured37.7%Only Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)1.5%26.5%Mercury 2
WeirdMLNot measured43.2%Only Mercury 2 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured785.6Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: coding12181390Mercury 2
LMArena Text: software and IT12151385Mercury 2
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1160Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1199Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
AA Intelligence Index5.910.8Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.6Only Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom14.0%70.8%Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)35.8%77.0%Mercury 2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.6%17.1%Mercury 2
LMArena Text: hard prompts11911362Mercury 2
LMArena Text: expert11831358Mercury 2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12031374Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
AA Math Index6.0Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)6.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: math1206Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1212Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)53.1%Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
MMLU70.8%Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: science12101343Mercury 2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12071363Mercury 2
LMArena Text: legal and government1221Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance11821349Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1036Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured998Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured985Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1009Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured983Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1022Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured998Only Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured988Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index013
General benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
IFBench29.4%69.8%Mercury 2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)13.0%43.7%Mercury 2
LMArena Text12081354Mercury 2
LMArena Text: instruction following11741328Mercury 2
LMArena Text: creative writing11721286Mercury 2
LMArena Text: English12241378Mercury 2
LMArena Text: non-English11861330Mercury 2
LMArena Text: Chinese12091414Mercury 2
LMArena Text: German1192Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1154Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1150Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: French1238Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1225Not measuredOnly Nova Micro 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: Russian11851304Mercury 2
LMArena Text: multi-turn11781357Mercury 2
LMArena Text: longer queries12051329Mercury 2
LMArena Text: writing and language11921300Mercury 2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11631314Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Mercury 2Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova Micro 1.0$0.0001Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request

Nova Micro 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Micro 1.0$0.0022Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request

Nova Micro 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Micro 1.0$0.0084Exceeds the context window
Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window

Nova Micro 1.0 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova Micro 1.0 and Mercury 2
SpecificationAmazon Nova Micro 1.0Inception Mercury 2
MakerAmazonInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 5, 2024March 4, 2026
Context window128K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.035$0.25
Output $/Mtok$0.14$0.75
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Micro 1.0 better than Mercury 2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Micro 1.0 for output tokens 5.4x cheaper ($0.14 vs $0.75 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Nova Micro 1.0 or Mercury 2?

Nova Micro 1.0 costs $0.035 per million input tokens and $0.14 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 costs $0.25 and $0.75. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova Micro 1.0 or Mercury 2?

Neither: both take 128K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Micro 1.0 vs Mercury 2 comparison based on?

26 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Micro 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Mercury 2's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next