Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct

Mercury 2.5 leads Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.3 to 9.6, and Mercury 2.5 costs 7.3x less per output token ($0.15 vs $1.10 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
2
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
1
vs boards won of 3 shared

Mercury 2.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct: which to pick

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct for a larger context window (262K against 260K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
3
Mercury 2.5 only
19
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct only
38
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, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 8.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Mercury 2.5 71.7% against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 63.7%, 8.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2.5 $0.15 against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct $1.10 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2.5 takes 260K tokens, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 262K.

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 2.5BarsQwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning01
General10
All shared boards21
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
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 measured78.4%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured9.8%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
ALE-Bench301.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1440Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1447Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 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 Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.39.6Mercury 2.5
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
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 measured41.5%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured75.9%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)11.8%12.6%Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1428Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1417Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1431Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured66.7%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured84.3Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured84.3%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
ProofBench3.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1440Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1434Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 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 Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
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 measured82.4%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1434Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1455Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1431Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1422Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
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 measured60.7%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.7%63.7%Mercury 2.5
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured55.6%Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1417Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1388Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1333Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1421Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1407Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1460Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1416Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1395Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1363Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1414Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1435Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1404Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1398Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1416Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1402Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1355Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1349Only Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 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 Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B InstructLeader
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
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct$0.0006Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct$0.0083Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0095Fits in one request
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct$0.031Fits 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 Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
SpecificationInception Mercury 2.5Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct
MakerInceptionQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 8, 2026September 11, 2025
Context window260K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.04$0.10
Output $/Mtok$0.15$1.10
Coding index1.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2.5 better than Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct for coding?

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct for a larger context window (262K against 260K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct?

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct costs $0.10 and $1.10. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2.5 or Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct?

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct, with 262K tokens against 260K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct 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 Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next