Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs Relace Apply 3

Mercury 2 costs 1.7x less per output token than Relace Apply 3 ($0.75 vs $1.25 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
Relace Apply 3Relace
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.25
vs $0.75 vs $1.25 per 1M output tokens. Mercury 2 is 1.7x cheaper.

Mercury 2 or Relace Apply 3: which to pick

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

Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $1.25 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 2 has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; Relace Apply 3 has none yet. 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 not benchmarked, Relace Apply 3 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 $0.75 against Relace Apply 3 $1.25 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Relace Apply 3 256K.

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 Index10 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
LMArena WebDev1171Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding Index31.1Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
SciCode37.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
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: coding1390Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1385Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: React1160Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1199Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index10.8Not measuredOnly 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 index2 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom70.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1362Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: expert1358Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1374Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
LMArena Text: science1343Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1363Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1349Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
Design Arena: websites1036Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: UI components998Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: game dev985Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1009Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: 3D983Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1022Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
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
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards measured
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3
BenchmarkMercury 2Relace Apply 3Leader
IFBench69.8%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text1354Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1328Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1286Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: English1378Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1330Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1414Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1304Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1357Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1329Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1300Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1314Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 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
Relace Apply 3$0.0015Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
Relace Apply 3$0.046Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
Relace Apply 3$0.182Fits 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 Relace Apply 3
SpecificationInception Mercury 2Relace Apply 3
MakerInceptionRelace
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026September 26, 2025
Context window128K256K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.85
Output $/Mtok$0.75$1.25
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than Relace Apply 3 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Mercury 2 for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($0.75 vs $1.25 per million).

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Relace Apply 3?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Relace Apply 3 costs $0.85 and $1.25. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Relace Apply 3?

Relace Apply 3, with 256K tokens against 128K.

Has any benchmark tested both Mercury 2 and Relace Apply 3?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 2 has results on LMArena WebDev, AA Coding Index and SciCode; Relace Apply 3 has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next