Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 3 vs Llama 3 8B Lunaris

Llama 3 8B Lunaris costs 7.0x less per output token than Mercury 3 ($0.05 vs $0.35 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Mercury 3Inception
Coding
29.3
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.35
S Llama 3 8B LunarisSao10K
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.05
vs $0.35 vs $0.05 per 1M output tokens. Llama 3 8B Lunaris is 7.0x cheaper.

Mercury 3 or Llama 3 8B Lunaris: which to pick

Only Mercury 3 has a coding score, 29.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3 8B Lunaris has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3 8B Lunaris for output tokens 7.0x cheaper ($0.05 vs $0.35 per million).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 3 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI); Llama 3 8B Lunaris 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 3 29.3 from 2 benchmarks, Llama 3 8B Lunaris 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 3 $0.35 against Llama 3 8B Lunaris $0.05 per million output tokens, 7.0x apart.
Context window
Mercury 3 takes 1M tokens, Llama 3 8B Lunaris 8K.

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 Index2 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris
BenchmarkMercury 3Llama 3 8B LunarisLeader
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)60.9%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris
BenchmarkMercury 3Llama 3 8B LunarisLeader
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)18.2%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)28.9%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)5.0%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris
BenchmarkMercury 3Llama 3 8B LunarisLeader
Design Arena: websites1226Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Design Arena: UI components1247Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Design Arena: game dev1227Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Design Arena: data viz1201Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1231Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Design Arena: SVG1174Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
General benchmarks for Mercury 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris
BenchmarkMercury 3Llama 3 8B LunarisLeader
Vals Index43.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 47 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 3$0.0003Fits in one request
Llama 3 8B Lunaris$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3 8B Lunaris costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 3$0.0060Fits in one request
Llama 3 8B Lunaris$0.0022Exceeds the context window

Llama 3 8B Lunaris costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 3$0.024Fits in one request
Llama 3 8B Lunaris$0.0085Exceeds the context window

Llama 3 8B Lunaris 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 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris
SpecificationInception Mercury 3Sao10K Llama 3 8B Lunaris
MakerInceptionSao10K
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 16, 2026August 13, 2024
Context window1M8K
Input $/Mtok$0.10$0.04
Output $/Mtok$0.35$0.05
Coding index29.3Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 3 better than Llama 3 8B Lunaris for coding?

Only Mercury 3 has a coding score, 29.3 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3 8B Lunaris has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3 8B Lunaris for output tokens 7.0x cheaper ($0.05 vs $0.35 per million).

Which is cheaper, Mercury 3 or Llama 3 8B Lunaris?

Mercury 3 costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.35 per million output tokens; Llama 3 8B Lunaris costs $0.04 and $0.05. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 3 or Llama 3 8B Lunaris?

Mercury 3, with 1M tokens against 8K.

Has any benchmark tested both Mercury 3 and Llama 3 8B Lunaris?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Mercury 3 has results on Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI), Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI); Llama 3 8B Lunaris has none yet. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 23, 2026.

Compare next