Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-6.1 Terra vs Mercury 2.5

GPT-6.1 Terra leads Mercury 2.5 on coding, 77.4 to 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Mercury 2.5 costs 33.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $5.00 per million). Updated October 29, 2026; 8 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-6.1 TerraOpenAI
Coding
77.4
Overall
76.8
Output $/M
$5.00
8
Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
0
vs boards won of 8 shared

GPT-6.1 Terra or Mercury 2.5: which to pick

Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 1.6 for Mercury 2.5.

Pick Mercury 2.5 for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $5.00 per million).

Shared results
8
GPT-6.1 Terra only
28
Mercury 2.5 only
13
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-6.1 Terra 77.4 from 4 benchmarks, Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Coding, 60.0 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-6.1 Terra 84.0% against Mercury 2.5 3.7%, 80.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-6.1 Terra $5.00 against Mercury 2.5 $0.15 per million output tokens, 33.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-6.1 Terra 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-6.1 TerraBarsMercury 2.5Ties
Coding40
Agentic work20
Reasoning10
General10
All shared boards80
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
Coding benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
LiveBench coding94.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev1673Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)49.5%0.0%GPT-6.1 Terra
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)84.0%3.7%GPT-6.1 Terra
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
SciCode55.1%38.5%GPT-6.1 Terra
ALE-Bench2608.8301.6GPT-6.1 Terra
LMArena WebDev: React1657Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1719Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
AA Intelligence Index51.0Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
LiveBench research73.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench browser93.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench long agentic48.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured18.9%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)15.2%2.5%GPT-6.1 Terra
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)26.0%4.3%GPT-6.1 Terra
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)1.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra 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
APEX-Agents68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
LiveBench reasoning88.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)46.2%11.8%GPT-6.1 Terra
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)94.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Mystery game puzzles74.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
EBR-bench78.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run)35.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
OTIS Mock AIME100.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 390.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
FrontierMath, tier 492.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
ProofBenchNot measured3.0%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.1%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured31.3%Only Mercury 2.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified57.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
Design Arena: websites1283Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: UI components1277Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: game dev1348Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Design Arena: all code categories1295Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench design82.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 2.5Leader
Vals Index60.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
LiveBench data analysis82.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
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)82.7%71.7%GPT-6.1 Terra
Furniture assembly79.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
MultiChallenge74.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-6.1 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
BenchmarkGPT-6.1 TerraMercury 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-6.1 Terra$0.0035Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0001Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Terra$0.065Fits in one request
Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-6.1 Terra$0.250Fits 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-6.1 Terra and Mercury 2.5
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-6.1 TerraInception Mercury 2.5
MakerOpenAIInception
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedOctober 26, 2026September 8, 2026
Context window1.05M260K
Input $/Mtok$1.00$0.04
Output $/Mtok$5.00$0.15
Coding index77.41.6
Independent measurements behind it42
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-6.1 Terra better than Mercury 2.5 for coding?

Pick GPT-6.1 Terra for coding: it scores 77.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 1.6 for Mercury 2.5. Pick Mercury 2.5 for output tokens 33.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $5.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Terra or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-6.1 Terra costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $5.00 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-6.1 Terra or Mercury 2.5?

GPT-6.1 Terra, with 1.05M tokens against 260K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-6.1 Terra vs Mercury 2.5 comparison based on?

8 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 29, 2026. GPT-6.1 Terra's coding index rests on 4 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-6-1-terra-vs-inception-mercury-2-5" title="GPT-6.1 Terra 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-6-1-terra-vs-inception-mercury-2-5">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-6.1 Terra vs Mercury 2.5</a></p>