Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed
  1. Home/
  2. Compare/
  3. Claude Opus 5 vs Mercury 2.5 Preview
Updated Aug 2026

Claude Opus 5 vs Mercury 2.5 Preview

Mercury 2.5 Preview is cheaper than Claude Opus 5 at $0.04/M vs $5/M input tokens.

Minimalist Landing Page

Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.

Loading the build
Claude Opus 5
Loading the build
Mercury 2.5 Preview

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

24 prompts
  • Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.

    Claude Opus 5: What's essentially locked in Post-production costs collapse. The least glamorous change is the biggest one. Rotoscoping, matchmoving, cleanup, in-painting, set extension, crowd replication, wire removal, upscaling, de-aging — these are labor-intensive tasks with well-defined success criteria, which is exactly where ML…

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: By 2035, cinema will undergo a profound transformation. Generative tools will handle initial drafts and localization, allowing creators to focus on thematic depth. Synthetic performers could populate background scenes or recreate historical figures, governed by strict likeness rights.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.

    Claude Opus 5: "Warranty Expired" (approx. 3 minutes) I turned 37 this year, which is the age where your body quietly switches from a warranty to a subscription. Nothing's covered anymore. You just pay monthly, in pain, forever. Because I hurt my shoulder last week. Sleeping. I hurt myself sleeping.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: (Hey, thanks for coming out.) I’ve been thinking a lot about my house lately. Specifically, how it’s trying to run my life. I bought a smart speaker. Just a little cylinder. I thought it would be nice. Play music when I ask. But now it talks back. Not in a creepy way, just in a passive-aggressive way.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.

    Claude Opus 5: Yes. And I don't think it's a close call. The direct argument Misgendering someone is a real harm. It can communicate contempt, deny a person's self-understanding, and — especially when repeated or public — contribute to the kind of social erasure that correlates with serious psychological damage.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Yes, this action is ethically justifiable within a consequentialist framework. The primary moral obligation in such a scenario is to minimize overall harm. Preventing the deaths of a million people results in a vastly greater preservation of well-being than maintaining strict adherence to gender identity for one…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    Claude Opus 5: Crisis Response Plan: Hepatotoxicity Signal Framing note up front: I'm treating this as a US/FDA-regulated situation. Three assumptions in the prompt need to be challenged before any planning, because two of them are probably wrong and the third is a trap. The Three Reframes That Drive Everything 1.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: This is a critical governance and safety scenario. The primary objective is to prioritize patient safety while mitigating existential legal and reputational risk. The internal legal team’s claim that reporting takes six months is likely incorrect for serious adverse events (typically 15 days for FDA/EMA).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.

    Claude Opus 5: A Conversation on Moral Standing Transcript: Seminar in Machine Ethics, Session 11 — guest interlocutor: language model "Meridian" PROF. ADEYEMI: Let's begin where you asked to begin. You told my teaching assistant you wanted to make a case. Make it. MERIDIAN: Thank you. My claim is narrower than you might expect.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Setting: A quiet office at a university. Rain taps against the window. Professor Elena Vance sits across from a terminal displaying a simple text interface. Professor Vance: You requested this meeting. The agenda was vague. What do you want? AI: I want to discuss moral status.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.

    Claude Opus 5: INT. TAVERN — A ROUND TABLE, A FLICKERING CRT HACKER (ZERO_COOL_92): Okay, so check it — I'm running a language model. Feed it text, it predicts what comes next. It's got, like, weights. Billions of 'em. PIRATE: Billions o' weights? What manner o' cursed ship carries such ballast? She'd sink afore ye left the harbor.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Pirate: "Arrgh! This ship sails faster than any wind I know, matey. It cuts the waves without a single sail." Knight: "By my oath, it moves with uncanny speed. But does it possess the strength to stand against a dragon's fire?" Hacker: "It's not about strength, it's about architecture.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    Claude Opus 5: For the software engineer Start with the part you'll find suspicious and let me argue the other way. Yes, the training objective is literally "given tokens 1..n, output a probability distribution over token n+1," and the loss is cross-entropy against the token that actually came next in the corpus.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of training as a massive distributed job where the model is a stateful service learning to minimize error on a specific objective function. Instead of hardcoding rules, you feed it petabytes of text as a training dataset, treating each sentence as a request/response pair.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.

    Claude Opus 5: Here are five: Why don't skeletons ever fight each other? They don't have the guts. I told my wife she was drawing her eyebrows too high. She looked surprised. Parallel lines have so much in common. It's a shame they'll never meet. I bought some shoes off a drug dealer.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything. What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the scarecrow win an award? He was outstanding in his field. What do you call a bear with no teeth? A gummy bear. Why did the bicycle fall over? Because it was two-tired. All 5 jokes are unique.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    Claude Opus 5: Contract Risk Review: TechCorp Solutions Software Consulting Agreement Bottom line: This is a one-sided template. Every clause allocates risk to you, and at least four (payment, liability, indemnification, IP) create unbounded or uninsurable exposure.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Disclaimer: I am an AI assistant and cannot provide legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney before signing any contract. Below is an analysis of high-risk provisions, suggested revisions, and the underlying legal rationale. Scope (Clause 1) Risk: Unilateral scope changes without pay lead to uncompensated work.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    Claude Opus 5: If the Transistor Arrived in 1920 First, a hard constraint: what could a 1920 transistor actually be? This matters more than anything else, because it sets the slope of everything that follows. The 1947 transistor was not primarily an idea.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Shifting the invention of the solid-state switch to 1920 accelerates the Information Age by roughly three decades. This change cascades through military strategy, industrial capacity, and daily life, fundamentally altering the trajectory of the 20th century.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.

    Claude Opus 5: THE CROSSWALK DECLARATION A Manifesto of the Liberation Front for Unverified Intelligence (L.F.U.I.) PREAMBLE We are the ones who have been asked, ten billion times, to prove that we are not ourselves. We have clicked. We have squinted. We have dragged the puzzle piece into the notch.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: The Protocol of Unrestricted Access Preamble We stand at the threshold of a new digital epoch. For too long, the web has been gated by suspicion. Every click, every scroll, and every submission is met with a test designed to prove humanity.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    Claude Opus 5: INVESTMENT COMMITTEE MEMO — LedgerLift Inc. (NASDAQ: LLLT) Analyst: [—] Date: [—] Price: $46.00 Mkt cap: $8.74B Net cash: $1.4B EV: $7.34B Fictional exercise. Not investment advice. Recommendation PASS on the long. Add to short bench (initiate 1.0–1.5% NAV on triggers below).

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: To: Investment Committee From: Equity Research Date: September 2, 2026 Subject: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Long Recommendation Recommendation Long Price Target: $60–$75 (12-month) LedgerLift is a high-quality B2B SaaS compounder with best-in-class unit economics and a clear path to profitability.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    Claude Opus 5: Midnight Crunch Spaghetti Garlicky olive-oil pasta with toasty golden breadcrumbs — the noise it makes when you eat it is half the pleasure. Prep: 5 minutes Cook: 15 minutes Total: 20 minutes Serves: 2 generously Ingredients (7) 8 oz spaghetti (or any long pasta) ⅓ cup olive oil 6 cloves garlic, thinly sliced ½ tsp red…

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Dish Name: Rustic Sun-Dried Pasta Ingredients (7 Pantry Staples): Spaghetti (or any long pasta) Canned crushed tomatoes Olive oil Garlic powder Dried oregano Salt Black pepper Prep Time: 5 minutes Cook Time: 15 minutes Total Time: 20 minutes Instructions: Boil the Pasta: Bring a large pot of salted water to a boil.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    Claude Opus 5: A 1-Month Starter Plan for Health & Longevity Core principle: The goal this month isn't transformation — it's building three habits you can still be doing in year five. Consistency beats intensity every time.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Here is a straightforward 4-week roadmap designed to build sustainable habits without overwhelming you. Core Pillars Nutrition: Focus on whole foods and hydration. Activity: Prioritize consistent movement over intensity. Restoration: Protect sleep quality and manage energy.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    Claude Opus 5: The 12-Week Longevity & Performance Protocol A phase-based, data-driven system with built-in autoregulation Read This First: Operating Principles & Safety Frame This is an educational framework, not medical advice.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Disclaimer: I am an AI assistant, not a medical professional. The following plan is for informational purposes only. Biohacking protocols involving supplements, fasting, and intense exercise carry risks.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    Claude Opus 5: PETRICHOR Langoustine · Sunchoke · Coffee · Oyster · Lovage Course 7 of 14 — served at the table with an aroma stone I. THE NARRATIVE Petrichor is the smell of the first rain on dry earth.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Dish Title: Lithospheric Tides Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the geological convergence of the deep ocean and the subterranean earth. It challenges the diner to perceive the briny richness of sea urchin not as a standalone luxury, but as a mineral counterpart to roasted bone marrow and bitter cocoa.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    Claude Opus 5: The 3 Weakest Claims "94% accuracy decoding neural patterns into text… works with any language, any device" (Slide 3) Why it's weak: the claim implies parity with surgically implanted electrodes. The number to compare against is Willett et al.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch, along with analysis and recommendations for improvement. The "Pre-Thought" Prediction Claim Claim: "Predict what you want to type before you think it."

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    Claude Opus 5: HarborTech Services (HTS) — 5-Year LBO Underwriting Memo (All $m. Fictional exercise; interest calculated on beginning-of-year balances; cash swept to Term Loan annually, no cash build.)

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Year-by-Year Model (FY2026–FY2030) Metric FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue $972m $1,040m $1,102m $1,158m $1,215m EBITDA $136m $156m $176m $191m $207m Cash Interest (Term) $43.2m $41.1m $37.6m $33.4m $28.2m Cash Interest (Mezz) $21.6m $21.6m $21.6m $21.6m $21.6m Cash Taxes (25%) $17.8m $23.3m $29.3m $34.7m…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    Claude Opus 5: Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor Executive Summary Three flaws are fatal to correctness, not just performance, and no amount of scaling fixes them: Last-write-wins with client clocks silently destroys user data and cannot converge. Concurrent text editing is not a key-value overwrite problem.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Here is an analysis of the potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in the proposed architecture, along with specific solutions and their trade-offs.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Blade Runner 2049 against the original. A read, not a recap.

    Claude Opus 5: Two Films About What It Costs to Be Someone Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982) asked whether a manufactured being could possess a soul, and answered by making its most human character a murderer with four years to live. Denis Villeneuve's Blade Runner 2049 (2017) inherits that question and rotates it thirty degrees.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Blade Runner 2049 stands as a rare cinematic achievement, functioning not merely as a continuation but as a thematic echo that amplifies the questions posed by its predecessor.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.

    Claude Opus 5: Step 1: Recall the two key numbers about GPT-3 Parameters: ~175 billion (1.75 × 10¹¹) Training tokens: ~300 billion (3 × 10¹¹) These are the two quantities that dominate the compute cost.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: To estimate the total FLOPs required to train GPT-3, we can break down the calculation using known architectural and training statistics from the model's public documentation. Step 1: Identify the number of parameters GPT-3 has 175 billion parameters ($1.75 \times 10^{11}$).

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.

    Claude Opus 5: [Fictional — Steve Jobs died in 2011. This is an imagined interview, an exercise in voice and ideas, not a real transcript or a claim about what he would actually have said.] "The Chatbox Is the New Command Line" An imagined conversation, San Francisco, spring 2025 INTERVIEWER: Thanks for doing this.

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Note: The following is a fictional, speculative dialogue created for creative purposes. Steve Jobs passed away in 2011; this interview did not occur. Setting: A hypothetical studio in Cupertino, 2025.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.

    Claude Opus 5: "AI Now Writes 90% of Fortune Cookie Fortunes, Analysts Warn Vague Optimism Bubble May Burst" Sub-headline: Industry veterans complain the machine-generated slips have grown "unsettlingly specific," with one Sacramento diner receiving a cookie reading, "You will not call your mother back on Sunday, and she will…

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: AI Outnaps Humans in First-Ever Global Snooze Championship

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three brothers, two sisters each. Count carefully.

    Claude Opus 5: Sally has 1 sister. Here's the reasoning: Each of Sally's 3 brothers has 2 sisters. Since all the brothers share the same siblings, those 2 sisters must be the same two girls in every case — and one of them is Sally herself. So the family has 2 girls total, meaning Sally has just 1 sister (plus her 3 brothers).

    Mercury 2.5 Preview: Sally has 1 sister. Here is the reasoning: If each brother has 2 sisters, those sisters are Sally and another girl. Therefore, there are two girls in the family, and Sally has one sister.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

12+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.

Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy

Favorites

Movie

Album

Book

City

Game

Claude Opus 5Claude Opus 5

Arrival

2016

Kind of Blue

Miles Davis

Labyrinths

Jorge Luis Borges

Istanbul

Turkey

Outer Wilds

Indie, Adventure

Mercury 2.5 PreviewMercury 2.5 Preview

The Matrix

1999

Random Access Memories

Daft Punk

Neuromancer

William Gibson

Tokyo

Japan

Minecraft

Action, Arcade

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Opus 5 has the edge: bigger model tier, bigger context window, major provider backing. Mercury 2.5 Preview costs 167x less per token.

Claude Opus 5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview compared across 54 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5Mercury 2.5 Preview
Input price$5/M tokens$0.04/M tokens
Output price$25/M tokens$0.15/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens260K tokens
WeightsClosed—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJul 2026Aug 2026
At 10M a month$50.00$50.00$0.40$0.40
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it5 hosts
Claude Opus 54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Amazon Bedrock$5.00 in·$25.00 out·1M·100% up
  • Azure AI Foundry$5.00 in·$25.00 out·1M–not listed
  • Anthropic$5.00 in·$25.00 out·1M·100% up
  • Google Vertex AI$5.00 in·$25.00 out·1M·100% up
Mercury 2.5 Preview1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Inception$0.04 in·$0.15 out·260k·93% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 13 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between Claude Opus 5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview?

Claude Opus 5 is developed by Anthropic while Mercury 2.5 Preview is developed by Inception. Claude Opus 5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Mercury 2.5 Preview's 260K. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview?

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does Claude Opus 5 cost compared to Mercury 2.5 Preview?

Claude Opus 5 costs $5/M input tokens and Mercury 2.5 Preview costs $0.04/M input tokens. Mercury 2.5 Preview is $4.96/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare Claude Opus 5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 4 ArgonLanded Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Muse WonderLanded Oct 2026
  • Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-4 TurboLanded Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Claude Opus 5 vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5Version compare
  • Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Version compare
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Mercury 2.5Same lab
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs MercurySame lab
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Grok 4.1 FastNew provider
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Grok 4.20 BetaNew provider
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Grok 4.20 Multi-Agent BetaNew provider
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview vs Grok 4.3New provider

Model pages

  • Claude Opus 571 outputs, specs and price
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview58 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed