Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2.5 vs Mistral Medium 3

Mercury 2.5 leads Mistral Medium 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.3 to 9.0, and Mercury 2.5 costs 13.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
3
Mistral Medium 3Mistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$2.00
0
vs boards won of 3 shared

Mercury 2.5 or Mistral Medium 3: which to pick

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
3
Mercury 2.5 only
19
Mistral Medium 3 only
54
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
Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks, Mistral Medium 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 40.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Mercury 2.5 71.7% against Mistral Medium 3 31.3%, 40.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2.5 $0.15 against Mistral Medium 3 $2.00 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2.5 takes 260K tokens, Mistral Medium 3 131K.

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
CategoryMercury 2.5BarsMistral Medium 3Ties
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
General10
All shared boards30
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)4.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)2.4%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)34.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)18.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)45.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured40.0%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.8%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
ALE-Bench301.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1385Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1385Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.39.0Mercury 2.5
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured134.0Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
Finance Agent (Vals AI)18.9%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)2.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)4.3%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)8.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured24.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured57.8%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)11.8%4.1%Mercury 2.5
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1364Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1342Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1374Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1155Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1165Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured30.3Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured30.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
ProofBench3.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1353Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1354Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)31.3%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured76.0%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1381Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1381Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1384Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1352Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1079Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1022Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1017Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1034Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1083Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1068Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)45.3%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
IFBenchNot measured39.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.7%31.3%Mercury 2.5
DTBenchNot measured62.3%Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1370Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1338Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1343Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1157Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1385Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1353Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1374Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1377Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1316Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1304Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1368Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1364Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1359Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1371Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1384Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1360Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1352Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1335Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1172Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1161Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1154Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1145Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1094Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1141Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1146Only Mistral Medium 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3Leader
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

Mercury 2.5$0.0001Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.0014Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.026Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0095Fits in one request
Mistral Medium 3$0.100Exceeds the context window

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 Mercury 2.5 and Mistral Medium 3
SpecificationInception Mercury 2.5Mistral Medium 3
MakerInceptionMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 8, 2026May 7, 2025
Context window260K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.04$0.40
Output $/Mtok$0.15$2.00
Coding index1.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2.5 better than Mistral Medium 3 for coding?

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mistral Medium 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Mistral Medium 3?

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Mistral Medium 3 costs $0.40 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2.5 or Mistral Medium 3?

Mercury 2.5, with 260K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2.5 vs Mistral Medium 3 comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Mercury 2.5's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Mistral Medium 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next