Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4 Turbo vs Mercury 2.5

Mercury 2.5 leads GPT-4 Turbo on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.3 to 7.0, and Mercury 2.5 costs 200.0x less per output token ($0.15 vs $30.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4 TurboOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$30.00
0
Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

GPT-4 Turbo or Mercury 2.5: which to pick

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
3
GPT-4 Turbo only
39
Mercury 2.5 only
19
Like-for-like categories
3 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 Turbo not benchmarked, Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 8.7 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run): GPT-4 Turbo 3.1% against Mercury 2.5 11.8%, 8.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4 Turbo $30.00 against Mercury 2.5 $0.15 per million output tokens, 200.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4 Turbo takes 128K 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 TurboBarsMercury 2.5Ties
Intelligence01
Reasoning01
Knowledge01
All shared boards03
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
AA Coding Index21.5Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo 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)29.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
SciCodeNot measured38.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured301.6Only Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding1268Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index7.012.3Mercury 2.5
Epoch Capabilities Index127.3Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 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
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.1%11.8%Mercury 2.5
LMArena Text: hard prompts1251Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: expert1223Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1266Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
ProofBenchNot measured3.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: math1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1268Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
LegalBench (Vals AI)80.5%83.1%Mercury 2.5
MedQA (Vals AI)82.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured31.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)69.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
MMLU81.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: science1256Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1239Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1265Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1222Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 2.5Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index25 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 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
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured71.7%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
DTBench61.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMCA9.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text1272Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1249Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1268Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Vision1090Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: English1291Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: non-English1245Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1242Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: German1259Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1194Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Korean1187Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: French1276Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1260Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Russian1259Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: Polish1302Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1267Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1254Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1279Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1258Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: English1097Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1045Not measuredOnly GPT-4 Turbo measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-4 TurboMercury 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 Turbo$0.025Fits 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 Turbo$0.590Fits 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 Turbo$2.30Exceeds the context window
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 Turbo and Mercury 2.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4 TurboInception Mercury 2.5
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 9, 2024September 8, 2026
Context window128K260K
Input $/Mtok$10.00$0.04
Output $/Mtok$30.00$0.15
Coding indexNot benchmarked1.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4 Turbo better than Mercury 2.5 for coding?

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4 Turbo has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4 Turbo or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-4 Turbo costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $30.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4 Turbo or Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5, with 260K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4 Turbo vs Mercury 2.5 comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4 Turbo'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