Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2.5 vs Beam 1.0 501B A23B

Mercury 2.5 costs 7.3x less per output token than Beam 1.0 501B A23B ($0.15 vs $1.10 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Mercury 2.5Inception
Coding
1.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
R Beam 1.0 501B A23BReflection
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.10
vs $0.15 vs $1.10 per 1M output tokens. Mercury 2.5 is 7.3x cheaper.

Mercury 2.5 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B: which to pick

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Beam 1.0 501B A23B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B for a larger context window (1.05M against 260K tokens).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 2.5 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Code migration (Vals AI); Beam 1.0 501B A23B on LMArena WebDev, LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT. 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Mercury 2.5 1.6 from 2 benchmarks, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 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
Mercury 2.5 $0.15 against Beam 1.0 501B A23B $1.10 per million output tokens, 7.3x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2.5 takes 260K tokens, Beam 1.0 501B A23B 1.05M.

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.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index14 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1437Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
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
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
ALE-Bench301.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1473Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1461Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1443Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1436Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.3Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
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
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)11.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1442Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1447Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1451Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
ProofBench3.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1459Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1475Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)31.3%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1430Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1376Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1433Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1430Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1250Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1224Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards measured
General benchmarks for Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B
BenchmarkMercury 2.5Beam 1.0 501B A23BLeader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)45.3%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)71.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2.5 measured
LMArena TextNot measured1425Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1430Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1390Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1436Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1413Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1424Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1461Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1412Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1414Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1429Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1400Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1399Only Beam 1.0 501B A23B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 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
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.0009Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0024Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.021Fits in one request

Mercury 2.5 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2.5$0.0095Fits in one request
Beam 1.0 501B A23B$0.081Fits 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 Beam 1.0 501B A23B
SpecificationInception Mercury 2.5Reflection Beam 1.0 501B A23B
MakerInceptionReflection
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 8, 2026October 16, 2026
Context window260K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.04$0.35
Output $/Mtok$0.15$1.10
Coding index1.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2.5 better than Beam 1.0 501B A23B for coding?

Only Mercury 2.5 has a coding score, 1.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Beam 1.0 501B A23B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Beam 1.0 501B A23B for a larger context window (1.05M against 260K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Beam 1.0 501B A23B costs $0.35 and $1.10. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2.5 or Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

Beam 1.0 501B A23B, with 1.05M tokens against 260K.

Has any benchmark tested both Mercury 2.5 and Beam 1.0 501B A23B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 2.5 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Code migration (Vals AI); Beam 1.0 501B A23B on LMArena WebDev, LMArena Text: coding and LMArena Text: software and IT. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next