Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.3-Codex vs Mercury 2.5

GPT-5.3-Codex leads Mercury 2.5 on coding, 60.0 to 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Mercury 2.5 costs 93.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 6 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.3-CodexOpenAI
Coding
60.0
Overall
32.5
Output $/M
$14.00
6
Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
12.3
Output $/M
$0.15
0
vs boards won of 6 shared

GPT-5.3-Codex or Mercury 2.5: which to pick

Pick GPT-5.3-Codex for coding: it scores 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 1.6 for Mercury 2.5.

Pick Mercury 2.5 for output tokens 93.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $14.00 per million).

Shared results
6
GPT-5.3-Codex only
28
Mercury 2.5 only
16
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-5.3-Codex 60.0 from 3 benchmarks, Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 51.5 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.3-Codex 61.8% against Mercury 2.5 3.7%, 58.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.3-Codex $14.00 against Mercury 2.5 $0.15 per million output tokens, 93.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.3-Codex takes 400K 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-5.3-CodexBarsMercury 2.5Ties
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
General10
All shared boards60
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
LMArena WebDev1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)87.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)78.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)61.8%3.7%GPT-5.3-Codex
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured4.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)53.8%2.4%GPT-5.3-Codex
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
SciCodeNot measured38.5%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)53.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench78.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
WeirdML79.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1655.2301.6GPT-5.3-Codex
LMArena WebDev: React1395Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1422Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex 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-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index32.512.3GPT-5.3-Codex
Epoch Capabilities Index157.1Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
Design Arena: agents building web apps1032Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps983Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1054Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1124Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
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 Telecom86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
METR time horizons74.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,940Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.5%11.8%GPT-5.3-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
ProofBenchNot measured3.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.1%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured31.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites1163Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: UI components1137Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: game dev1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: data viz1164Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: 3D1008Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categories1145Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: SVG1129Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1152Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 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
IFBench75.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.3%71.7%GPT-5.3-Codex
Neither model has a result on the other 42 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexMercury 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-5.3-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0001Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.490Fits 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-5.3-Codex and Mercury 2.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.3-CodexInception Mercury 2.5
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedFebruary 24, 2026September 8, 2026
Context window400K260K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.04
Output $/Mtok$14.00$0.15
Coding index60.01.6
Independent measurements behind it32
Cost per solved task$0.59Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.3-Codex better than Mercury 2.5 for coding?

Pick GPT-5.3-Codex for coding: it scores 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 1.6 for Mercury 2.5. Pick Mercury 2.5 for output tokens 93.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3-Codex or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 and $0.15. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.3-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.3-Codex or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-5.3-Codex, with 400K tokens against 260K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.3-Codex vs Mercury 2.5 comparison based on?

6 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-5.3-Codex's coding index rests on 3 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

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-3-codex-vs-inception-mercury-2-5" title="GPT-5.3-Codex vs Mercury 2.5, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-3-codex-vs-inception-mercury-2-5">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.3-Codex vs Mercury 2.5</a></p>