Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs o3

o3 leads Mercury 2 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.2 to 10.8, and Mercury 2 costs 10.7x less per output token ($0.75 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 33 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
1
o3OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
51.1
Output $/M
$8.00
31
vs boards won of 33 shared, 1 tied

Mercury 2 or o3: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 10.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $8.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or WeirdML, where it leads.

Shared results
33
Mercury 2 only
9
o3 only
69
Like-for-like categories
7 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, o3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 11.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Mercury 2 43.7% against o3 74.7%, 31.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2 $0.75 against o3 $8.00 per million output tokens, 10.7x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, o3 200K.

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 2Barso3Ties
Coding05
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Knowledge03
Web design131 tie
General013
All shared boards1311 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured81.3%Only o3 measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured58.4%Only o3 measured
SWE-bench MultimodalNot measured36.0%Only o3 measured
LMArena WebDev1171Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding Index31.1Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.9%Only o3 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured80.8%Only o3 measured
SciCode37.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%37.1%o3
GSO-BenchNot measured8.8%Only o3 measured
WeirdML43.2%52.4%o3
ALE-Bench785.6933.5o3
LMArena Text: coding13901407o3
LMArena Text: software and IT13851415o3
LMArena WebDev: React1160Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1199Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
SciCodeNot measured9.2%Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.820.2o3
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured146.7Only o3 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom70.8%80.7%o3
METR time horizonsNot measured65.4%Only o3 measured
GDPvalNot measured30.8%Only o3 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured45.2%Only o3 measured
OSWorldNot measured23.0%Only o3 measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured63.0%Only o3 measured
BrowseComp-PlusNot measured65.9%Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured84.1%Only o3 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured80.4%Only o3 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%82.7%o3
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%20.1%o3
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured81.8%Only o3 measured
ARC-AGINot measured60.8%Only o3 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured6.5%Only o3 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured53.1%Only o3 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured37.0%Only o3 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured29.0%Only o3 measured
VPCTNot measured52.0%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13621402o3
LMArena Text: expert13581402o3
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13741411o3
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1220Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1234Only o3 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured67.6%Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
AIMENot measured85.3%Only o3 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured94.6%Only o3 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured91.8%Only o3 measured
AA Math IndexNot measured88.3Only o3 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured88.3%Only o3 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured84.4%Only o3 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured33.3%Only o3 measured
MATH level 5Not measured97.8%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1426Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1423Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
MMLU ProNot measured85.6%Only o3 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured83.8%Only o3 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured59.7%Only o3 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.6%Only o3 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured65.7%Only o3 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.1%Only o3 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured47.3%Only o3 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured85.3%Only o3 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured49.4%Only o3 measured
GeoBenchNot measured74.0%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: science13431429o3
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13631448o3
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1428Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance13491393o3
FACTS Benchmark SuiteNot measured44.4%Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
Design Arena: websites10361036Tie
Design Arena: UI components9961017o3
Design Arena: game dev9841034o3
Design Arena: data viz10091200o3
Design Arena: 3D982Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories10211020Mercury 2
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 index013
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured41.8%Only o3 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured76.7%Only o3 measured
IFBench69.8%71.4%o3
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%74.7%o3
DTBenchNot measured84.8%Only o3 measured
LMCANot measured39.7%Only o3 measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured88.9%Only o3 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured83.9%Only o3 measured
CL-benchNot measured17.8%Only o3 measured
LMArena Text13541410o3
LMArena Text: instruction following13281368o3
LMArena Text: creative writing12861359o3
LMArena VisionNot measured1214Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: English13781417o3
LMArena Text: non-English13301401o3
LMArena Text: Chinese14141437o3
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1420Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1403Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1370Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1430Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1395Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: Russian13041406o3
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1438Only o3 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13571405o3
LMArena Text: longer queries13291372o3
LMArena Text: writing and language13001372o3
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13141373o3
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1221Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1237Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1218Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1222Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: captioningNot measured1210Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1234Only o3 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1201Only o3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mercury 2 and o3
BenchmarkMercury 2o3Leader
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
o3$0.0060Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
o3$0.124Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
o3$0.480Exceeds the context window

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 o3
SpecificationInception Mercury 2OpenAI o3
MakerInceptionOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026April 16, 2025
Context window128K200K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$2.00
Output $/Mtok$0.75$8.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.571
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than o3 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 10.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $8.00 per million) and work measured by Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) or WeirdML, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or o3?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; o3 costs $2.00 and $8.00. Cost per solved task is known for o3 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or o3?

o3, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs o3 comparison based on?

33 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and o3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next