Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 vs Mercury 2.5

GPT-4.1 leads Mercury 2.5 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.7 to 12.3, and Mercury 2.5 costs 53.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4.1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
36.5
Output $/M
$8.00
3
Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
2
vs boards won of 5 shared

GPT-4.1 or Mercury 2.5: which to pick

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 260K tokens) and work measured by ALE-Bench or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
5
GPT-4.1 only
87
Mercury 2.5 only
17
Like-for-like categories
5 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
GPT-4.1 not benchmarked, Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 8.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ALE-Bench: GPT-4.1 558.1 against Mercury 2.5 301.6, 8.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 $8.00 against Mercury 2.5 $0.15 per million output tokens, 53.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 takes 1.05M tokens, Mercury 2.5 260K.

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
CategoryGPT-4.1BarsMercury 2.5Ties
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning01
Knowledge10
General01
All shared boards32
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
Aider polyglot52.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)54.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured3.7%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured4.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured2.4%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured34.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured18.1%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured45.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)45.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SciCodeNot measured38.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
WeirdML39.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ALE-Bench558.1301.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Text: coding1390Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1391Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.712.3GPT-4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index136.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured18.9%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured4.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured8.8%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom47.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)54.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
BrowseComp-Plus36.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
GPQA Diamond65.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)66.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%11.8%Mercury 2.5
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)66.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI5.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI-20.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleBench27.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Chess puzzles3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1384Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1364Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1393Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1215Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1248Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
AIME39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)87.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)87.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AA Math Index34.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
OTIS Mock AIME38.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ProofBenchNot measured3.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MATH level 583.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1360Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
MMLU Pro80.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%83.1%GPT-4.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)69.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured31.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleQA Verified31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GeoBench72.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1379Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1399Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites1038Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components997Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1079Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1104Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D849Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1025Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured45.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured55.1%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
IFBench43.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)68.3%71.7%Mercury 2.5
DTBench68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMCA25.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text1383Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1367Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1363Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1392Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1370Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1381Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1319Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1338Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1376Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1377Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1389Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1397Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1385Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1371Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1365Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: English1209Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1226Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1218Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1196Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1207Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1208Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4.1Mercury 2.5Leader
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

GPT-4.1$0.0060Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0001Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.124Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.480Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0095Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 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 GPT-4.1 and Mercury 2.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1Inception Mercury 2.5
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 14, 2025September 8, 2026
Context window1.05M260K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.04
Output $/Mtok$8.00$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarked1.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved task$0.37Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Mercury 2.5 for coding?

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4.1 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 260K tokens) and work measured by ALE-Bench or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $8.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-4.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-4.1, with 1.05M tokens against 260K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 vs Mercury 2.5 comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Mercury 2.5's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next