Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o-mini vs Mercury 2

Mercury 2 leads GPT-4o-mini on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.8 to 6.7, and GPT-4o-mini costs 1.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $0.75 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o-miniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
5
vs boards won of 5 shared

GPT-4o-mini or Mercury 2: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4o-mini for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.75 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
5
GPT-4o-mini only
24
Mercury 2 only
37
Like-for-like categories
4 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-4o-mini not benchmarked, Mercury 2 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 38.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
IFBench: GPT-4o-mini 31.0% against Mercury 2 69.8%, 38.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o-mini $0.60 against Mercury 2 $0.75 per million output tokens, 1.3x 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
CategoryGPT-4o-miniBarsMercury 2Ties
Coding01
Intelligence01
Reasoning02
General01
All shared boards05
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1171Only Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding Index11.431.1Mercury 2
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)26.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)23.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
SciCodeNot measured37.7%Only Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured26.5%Only Mercury 2 measured
WeirdMLNot measured43.2%Only Mercury 2 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured785.6Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1390Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1385Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1160Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1199Only Mercury 2 measured
SciCode1.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
AA Intelligence Index6.710.8Mercury 2
Epoch Capabilities Index126.5Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.6Only Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured70.8%Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
GPQA Diamond44.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)56.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.6%77.0%Mercury 2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%17.1%Mercury 2
ARC-AGI-20.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1362Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1358Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1374Only Mercury 2 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark28.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
AIME11.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)72.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MGSM (Vals AI)86.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
AA Math Index14.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)14.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
GSM8K91.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
MMLU Pro62.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)45.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)60.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)54.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)64.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
MMLU81.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1343Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1363Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1349Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 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 index01
General benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 2Leader
IFBench31.0%69.8%Mercury 2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured43.7%Only Mercury 2 measured
DTBench54.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
LMCA10.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
PIQA88.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena TextNot measured1354Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1328Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1286Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1378Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1330Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1414Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1304Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1357Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1329Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1300Only Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1314Only Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o-mini and Mercury 2
BenchmarkGPT-4o-miniMercury 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

GPT-4o-mini$0.0004Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini$0.0093Fits in one request
Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o-mini$0.036Exceeds the context window
Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o-mini 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-4o-mini and Mercury 2
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o-miniInception Mercury 2
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 18, 2024March 4, 2026
Context window128K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.15$0.25
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.75
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o-mini better than Mercury 2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o-mini for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $0.75 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o-mini or Mercury 2?

GPT-4o-mini costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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, GPT-4o-mini or Mercury 2?

Neither: both take 128K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o-mini vs Mercury 2 comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4o-mini'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