Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs Muse Wonder

Mercury 2 costs 26.7x less per output token than Muse Wonder ($0.75 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 31 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
0
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
31
vs boards won of 31 shared

Mercury 2 or Muse Wonder: which to pick

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 26.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
31
Mercury 2 only
11
Muse Wonder only
29
Like-for-like categories
5 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 not benchmarked, Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Web design, 45.9 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena WebDev: React: Mercury 2 1160 against Muse Wonder 1641, 73.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2 $0.75 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 26.7x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Muse Wonder 1.05M.

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 2BarsMuse WonderTies
Coding06
Reasoning04
Knowledge03
Web design06
General012
All shared boards031
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
LMArena WebDev11711652Muse Wonder
AA Coding Index31.1Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured49.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured83.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured62.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured66.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured26.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.4%Only Muse Wonder measured
SciCode37.7%60.3%Muse Wonder
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
WeirdML43.2%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
ALE-Bench785.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: coding13901522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT13851515Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React11601641Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: HTML11991694Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.8Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured161.8Only Muse Wonder measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1243Only Muse Wonder measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured36.3%Only Muse Wonder measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured23.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured67.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured67.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured22.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vals Science IndexNot measured39.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
τ²-Bench Telecom70.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$9,432Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured27.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%50.1%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts13621506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert13581513Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13741506Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
ProofBenchNot measured84.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1486Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1514Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
LMArena Text: science13431506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13631512Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1505Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: business and finance13491483Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: websites10361362Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components9961379Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev9841376Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz10091317Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D9821427Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories10211371Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVG998Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art988Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index012
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
Vals IndexNot measured64.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
IFBench69.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%80.7%Muse Wonder
DTBenchNot measured95.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMCANot measured56.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text13541502Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following13281491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing12861491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: English13781507Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English13301492Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese14141537Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1523Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: Russian13041522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: multi-turn13571510Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries13291493Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language13001496Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13141482Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkMercury 2Muse WonderLeader
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$0.0006Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request

Mercury 2 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 and Muse Wonder
SpecificationInception Mercury 2Meta Muse Wonder
MakerInceptionMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026October 12, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.25$4.00
Output $/Mtok$0.75$20.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked71.9
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than Muse Wonder for coding?

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Mercury 2 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 26.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Muse Wonder?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Muse Wonder?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

31 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Muse Wonder's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next