GPT-5.2 Pro vs Mercury 3
Mercury 3 costs 480.0x less per output token than GPT-5.2 Pro ($0.35 vs $168.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $168.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.35
GPT-5.2 Pro or Mercury 3: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.2 Pro has results on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2; Mercury 3 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Mercury 3 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1244.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Mercury 3
Mercury 3 takes 1M tokens against 400K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Mercury 3
GPT-5.2 Pro $0.105, Mercury 3 $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- GPT-5.2 Pro not benchmarked, Mercury 3 not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- GPT-5.2 Pro $168.00 against Mercury 3 $0.35 per million output tokens, 480.0x apart.
- Context window
- GPT-5.2 Pro takes 400K tokens, Mercury 3 1M.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Mercury 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 156.3 | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Mercury 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI | 90.5% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 54.2% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| SimpleBench | 57.4% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Chess puzzles | 60.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Mercury 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 74.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 46.0% | Not measured | Only GPT-5.2 Pro measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 Pro | Mercury 3 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | Not measured | 1244 | Only Mercury 3 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | Not measured | 1270 | Only Mercury 3 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1227 | Only Mercury 3 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1207 | Only Mercury 3 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | Not measured | 1240 | Only Mercury 3 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 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
Mercury 3 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Mercury 3 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Mercury 3 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.
| Specification | OpenAI GPT-5.2 Pro | Inception Mercury 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | OpenAI | Inception |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 10, 2025 | October 16, 2026 |
| Context window | 400K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $21.00 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $168.00 | $0.35 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is GPT-5.2 Pro better than Mercury 3 for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 Pro or Mercury 3?
GPT-5.2 Pro costs $21.00 per million input tokens and $168.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 3 costs $0.10 and $0.35. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2 Pro or Mercury 3?
Mercury 3, with 1M tokens against 400K.
Has any benchmark tested both GPT-5.2 Pro and Mercury 3?
No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.2 Pro has results on Epoch Capabilities Index, ARC-AGI and ARC-AGI-2; Mercury 3 on Design Arena: websites, Design Arena: UI components and Design Arena: game dev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.