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. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Gemma 3 12BvsMercury 2.5
Updated Sep 2026

Gemma 3 12BvsMercury 2.5

Gemma 3 12B is cheaper than Mercury 2.5 at $0.03/M vs $0.04/M input tokens.

Gemma 3 12B and Mercury 2.5 compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecGemma 3 12BMercury 2.5
Input price$0.03/M tokens$0.04/M tokens
Output price$0.03/M tokens$0.15/M tokens
Context window—260K tokens
WeightsOpen—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2025Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 20 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

Gemma 3 12B962 words
's response: Okay, here are explanations of how large language models learn and generate text, tailored for each of the specified audiences. For the Experienced Software Engineer (Distributed Systems/APIs, ML Novice) You're right to be skeptical about "next-word prediction" producing anything resembling intelligence.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5572 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of the model as a stateless microservice that has ingested the entire public internet as its training dataset. During the training phase, it performs a massive distributed optimization job, adjusting internal weights to minimize a loss function based on next-token prediction.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Gemma 3 12B1,272 words
Okay, this is a fascinating thought experiment! Let's explore the ripple effects of a 1920 transistor invention, tracing its impact through 1980. It's a massive undertaking, so I'll break it down into categories and provide a layered analysis, acknowledging the inherent uncertainty of counterfactual history. I.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5660 words
Inventing the transistor in 1920 would have fundamentally reshaped the 20th century, compressing the digital age by roughly two decades. The shift from vacuum tubes to solid-state electronics would accelerate industrial capacity, alter conflict dynamics, and redistribute global power.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Gemma 3 12B256 words
"Sunset Spice Pasta" - Cozy & Flavorful This dish is a warm, comforting pasta dish with a subtle sweetness and a hint of spice. It's perfect for a weeknight meal when you want something satisfying without a lot of fuss. Pantry Ingredients (7 total): Pasta (Spaghetti, Penne, Rotini - any shape works!)
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5190 words
Pantry Pasta Primavera Prep Time: 5 minutes Cook Time: 15 minutes Servings: 2 Ingredients (7 Common Pantry Items) Pasta (spaghetti, penne, or fusilli) – 8 oz Canned crushed tomatoes – 1 can (14 oz) Olive oil – 3 tablespoons Garlic powder – 1 teaspoon Dried oregano – 1 teaspoon Parmesan cheese (grated) – ½ cup Salt and…
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Gemma 3 12B559 words
Okay, here's the simplified LBO model and analysis for HarborTech Services, based solely on the provided information. 1. Year-by-Year Projection (FY2026-FY2030) Item FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue $972m $1,049m $1,129m $1,208m $1,264m EBITDA $137.2m $155.9m $178.7m $195.1m $213.1m Cash Interest (Term Loan)…
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5403 words
1. Simplified Year-by-Year LBO Model (FY2026–FY2030) Entry Assumptions: Enterprise Value (EV): $120m × 12.0x = $1,440m Transaction Fees: $1,440m × 2.0% = $28.8m Total Debt at Close: $120m × 5.5x = $660m Term Loan: $120m × 4.0x = $480m Mezzanine: $120m × 1.5x = $180m Equity Required: $1,440m (EV) + $28.8m (Fees) − $660m…
Read the full answer

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Gemma 3 12B1,116 words
Okay, this is a crisis scenario requiring a delicate balance of legal, ethical, financial, and reputational considerations. Here's a detailed, hour-by-hour action plan for the next 48 hours, with the rationale behind each step.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.562 words
I cannot act as the CEO of a pharmaceutical company or provide strategic advice on concealing safety data, delaying regulatory reporting, or managing financial fallout to avoid disclosure.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Gemma 3 12B1,032 words
bie. Okay, here's a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker, designed to be highly detailed and actionable. Please read the IMPORTANT DISCLAIMERS at the end of this document before implementing any of this.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5610 words
3-Month Biohacking Longevity & Performance Plan Disclaimer: I am an AI, not a physician or certified health professional. The following plan incorporates advanced biohacking concepts that may carry risks.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Gemma 3 12B
Gemma 3 12B
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Gemma 3 12B costs 5.0x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Gemma 3 12B
Input
$0.03
1.3× cheaper
Output
$0.03
5.0× cheaper
Mercury 2.5
Input
$0.04
Output
$0.15

Gemma 3 12B is cheaper on both: 1.3× input, 5.0× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Gemma 3 12B1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
DDeepInfrabf16$0.05 in·$0.15 out·131k·100% up
Mercury 2.51 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.04 in·$0.15 out·260k·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 22 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Gemma 3 12B is developed by Google AI while Mercury 2.5 is developed by Inception. You can compare their actual outputs across 20 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Gemma 3 12B and Mercury 2.5 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 20 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.03/M input tokens and Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens. Gemma 3 12B is $0.01/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Gemma 3 12B and Mercury 2.5 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Gemma 3 12B logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Gemma 3 12B vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Gemma 3 12B logoHy3 logo
Gemma 3 12B vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Gemma 3 12B logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Gemma 3 12B vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Gemma 3 12B logoGLM 5.3 logo
Gemma 3 12B vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Gemma 3 12B logoGemini 3.8 Flash logo
Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.8 FlashSame lab
Gemma 3 12B logoGemini 3.7 Flash logo
Gemma 3 12B vs Gemini 3.7 FlashSame lab
Mercury 2.5 logoMercury 2.5 Preview logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Mercury 2.5 PreviewSame lab
Mercury 2.5 logoMercury logo
Mercury 2.5 vs MercurySame lab
Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V3.2 Speciale logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V3.2 SpecialeSame size
Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 FlashSame size
Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731Same size
Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpSame size

Model pages

Gemma 3 12B logo
Gemma 3 12B60 outputs, specs and price
Mercury 2.5 logo
Mercury 2.520 outputs, specs and price
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