Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Mercury 2 scores 0.0 and Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, but no coding benchmark measured both, so the gap is directional, not a ranking.
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash when output tokens cost 1.6x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 128K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- Mercury 2 only
- 42
- Qwen3.8 Flash only
- 7
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
No call
0.0 against 87.4, from different benchmarks with none in common.
Directional only
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Mercury 2 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 10.8.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Mercury 2 has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.6.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Mercury 2 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1036.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash takes 1M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash
Mercury 2 $0.0006, Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Mercury 2 0.0 from 1 benchmark, Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Mercury 2 $0.75 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 1.6x apart.
- Context window
- Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Qwen3.8 Flash 1M.
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.
CodingDirectional onlyFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index11 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 31.1 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| SciCode | 37.7% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 26.5% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 785.6 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1390 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1385 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1160 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1199 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.8 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 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, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.6 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LiveBench research | Not measured | 74.6% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench browser | Not measured | 48.0% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | Not measured | 37.1% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 70.8% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | Not measured | 87.4% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.0% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.1% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1362 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1358 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1374 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | 1343 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1363 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1349 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1036 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 998 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 985 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1009 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 982 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1022 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 998 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 990 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LiveBench design | Not measured | 72.8% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured |
| IFBench | 69.8% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 43.7% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text | 1354 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1328 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1286 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1378 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1330 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1414 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1304 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1357 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1329 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1300 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1314 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash 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.
| Specification | Inception Mercury 2 | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Inception | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | March 4, 2026 | August 26, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.75 | $0.47 |
| Coding index | 0.0 | 87.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Mercury 2 better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?
Mercury 2 scores 0.0 and Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index, but no coding benchmark measured both, so the gap is directional, not a ranking. Pick Qwen3.8 Flash when output tokens cost 1.6x less, or when the context window is larger, 1M against 128K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Qwen3.8 Flash, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.8 Flash's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.