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. GPT-3.5 TurbovsMercury 2.5
Updated Sep 2026

GPT-3.5 TurbovsMercury 2.5

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper than GPT-3.5 Turbo at $0.04/M vs $1.5/M input tokens.

GPT-3.5 Turbo and Mercury 2.5 compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecGPT-3.5 TurboMercury 2.5
Input price$1.5/M tokens$0.04/M tokens
Output price$2/M tokens$0.15/M tokens
Context window16K tokens260K tokens
WeightsClosed—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2022Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

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

Mini LBO Underwrite

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

GPT-3.5 Turbo222 words
Year-by-year table: Year Revenue EBITDA Cash Interest (TL) Cash Interest (Mezz) Cash Taxes Capex ΔNWC Free Cash Flow Ending Debt (TL + Mezz) 2026 $972m $136m $36m $18m $25.5m $29.2m $4.86m $60.44m $528.14m 2027 $1,038m $156m $36m $18m $30m $31.1m $5.19m $63.81m $475.75m 2028 $1,105m $177m $36m $18m $35.25m $33.2m…
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

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

GPT-3.5 Turbo184 words
Problem: The claim that current BCI technology is too invasive is weak because it lacks specific evidence or examples to support it. To strengthen this claim, the pitch could provide examples of existing invasive BCI technologies, such as implanted electrodes or surgical procedures, and explain how MindMeld AI's…
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5544 words
Based on the pitch deck summary, here are the three weakest claims, along with an analysis of their vulnerabilities and concrete suggestions for improvement. The "Pre-Thought" Prediction Claim Claim: "MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it."
Read the full answer

Beginner's Longevity Plan

Outline a simple, actionable 1-month plan for someone starting their journey towards better health and longevity. Focus on 3 key areas…

GPT-3.5 Turbo289 words
Week 1: Diet Start by incorporating more whole, unprocessed foods into your meals such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, lean proteins, and healthy fats. Begin by adding 1 extra serving of vegetables to your meals each day. Replace sugary drinks with water or herbal tea.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5325 words
Here is a simple, actionable 1-month plan to kickstart your journey toward better health and longevity. This guide focuses on three foundational pillars: Nutrition, Movement, and Sleep. Week 1: Awareness & Small Wins Goal: Build habits without overwhelming yourself.
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…

GPT-3.5 Turbo597 words
Month 1: Supplement Stack: Morning: 500mg of Nicotinamide Riboside 300mg of CoQ10 1000mg of Omega-3 fish oil Afternoon: 2000mg of KSM-66 Ashwagandha 1000mg of Rhodiola Rosea 200mg of L-Theanine Evening: 5mg of Melatonin 400mg of Magnesium Glycinate Dietary Protocol: Follow a ketogenic diet with a focus on high-quality…
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

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

GPT-3.5 Turbo275 words
PAYMENT: The clause stating that payment is due within 90 days of invoice receipt could potentially be exploited against the contractor as it is a longer payment term than industry standard. This could result in cash flow issues for the contractor.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5501 words
Here is an analysis of the contract clauses that pose significant risk to the contractor, along with suggested modifications and legal reasoning. Scope and Compensation (Clause 1) Risk: The client can expand the project indefinitely without paying extra.
Read the full answer

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…

GPT-3.5 Turbo469 words
To an experienced software engineer, a large language model like GPT or Claude may seem like a black box, especially if they haven't delved into the world of machine learning. However, the underlying concept is not as complex as it may seem.
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
Our Verdict
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5
GPT-3.5 Turbo
GPT-3.5 TurboRunner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Mercury 2.5 has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.

Mercury 2.5 costs 13x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GPT-3.5 Turbo
Input
$1.50
Output
$2.00
Mercury 2.5
Input
$0.04
38× cheaper
Output
$0.15
13× cheaper

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper on both: 38× input, 13× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

GPT-3.5 Turbo1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
OpenAI$0.50 in·$1.50 out·16k·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 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

GPT-3.5 Turbo is developed by OpenAI while Mercury 2.5 is developed by Inception. GPT-3.5 Turbo has a 16K token context window vs Mercury 2.5's 260K. You can compare their actual outputs across 20 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. GPT-3.5 Turbo 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.

GPT-3.5 Turbo costs $1.5/M input tokens and Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens. Mercury 2.5 is $1.46/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 GPT-3.5 Turbo 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

GPT-3.5 Turbo logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoHy3 logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoGLM 5.3 logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo 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

GPT-3.5 Turbo logoGPT-6 Astra Pro logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs GPT-6 Astra ProVersion compare
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoGPT-6 Astra logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs GPT-6 AstraVersion compare
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
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoTrinity Large Preview logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs Trinity Large PreviewNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoAndromeda Alpha logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Andromeda AlphaNew provider
GPT-3.5 Turbo logoAurora Alpha logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo vs Aurora AlphaNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoBert-Nebulon Alpha logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Bert-Nebulon AlphaSame size

Model pages

GPT-3.5 Turbo logo
GPT-3.5 Turbo58 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