Mercury 2 is cheaper than GPT-4 Turbo at $0.25/M vs $10/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-4 Turbo: Recipe: Heavenly Honey Garlic Chicken Bites Ingredients: Chicken breasts (2 large) Garlic powder (1 tablespoon) Honey (1/4 cup) Soy sauce (2 tablespoons) Olive oil (2 tablespoons) Salt (to taste) Black pepper (to taste) Prep/Cook Time: 25 minutes (Prep: 10 mins, Cook: 15 mins) Instructions: Prepare the Chicken: Cut the…
Mercury 2: Golden‑Crunch Oatmeal Squares A sweet, chewy snack that comes together with just seven pantry staples. Ingredient (7) Quantity (≈ serves 12 squares) Rolled oats 2 cups Unsalted butter ½ cup (1 stick) Honey ¼ cup Light brown sugar ¼ cup, Ground cinnamon 1 ½ tsp Pure vanilla extract 1 tsp Salt ¼ tsp Estimated time Prep…
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-4 Turbo: 3-Month Longevity Plan for a Biohacker Month 1: Foundation Setting Dietary Protocol: Nutrition Focus: Adopt a cyclic ketogenic diet. Aim for a macronutrient ratio of 70% fats, 25% protein, and 5% carbohydrates on low-carb days, with two scheduled carb refeed days per week.
Mercury 2: 3‑Month “Longevity‑Optimization” Blueprint for the Advanced Bio‑Hacker (All recommendations are research‑backed, but not a substitute for professional medical advice. Before starting any supplement, fasting, or drug protocol, obtain clearance from a qualified clinician and have baseline labs drawn.)
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
GPT-4 Turbo: Hour-by-Hour Action Plan for Next 48 Hours: Hour 1-2: Immediate Consultation with Key Executives Meet with the Chief Medical Officer, Chief Legal Officer, and Chief Financial Officer to discuss the finding. Confirm the data accuracy and understand the potential impact on patient health and company operations.
Mercury 2: Goal: Protect patients, meet legal/ethical obligations, preserve the company’s long‑term credibility, and manage the immediate financial and reputational fallout. Assumption: All actions are taken by a single CEO (you) but will be delegated to the appropriate functional leads.
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GPT-4 Turbo: Weakest Claim 1: Vision - "MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it." Why It's Weak: The claim of predicting what one wants to type before even thinking it seems scientifically and technically exaggerated.
Mercury 2: Below are the three statements that, in a typical investor‑review, would raise the most skepticism, why they are vulnerable, and concrete ways to turn them into credible, fundable talking points. 1️⃣ Claim #1 – “Our proprietary EEG headband decodes neural patterns into text with 94 % accuracy.”
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-4 Turbo: Hey everyone! Great to be here! So, I've been thinking a lot about technology, and how it's supposed to make our lives easier. But sometimes, I feel like it just gives us a whole new set of problems. Like, remember when a phone was just a phone? Now it's my camera, my GPS, my fitness tracker...
Mercury 2: [Spotlight comes up. The comedian walks to the mic, glances at the audience, and smiles.] Comedian: Hey, everyone! Great to be here. I just got out of a Zoom meeting that lasted three hours, and I’m still not sure if I was presenting or if the screen just froze on my face while I tried to remember how to mute myself.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-4 Turbo: Pirate: Arrr, so explain to me again, what be this AI model ye speak of? Hacker: Dude, it’s like, a computer program, right? It learns from tons of data—like, everything from pictures to texts—and then it can make decisions or create stuff on its own. Knight: Pray, tell me, does this creation serve a noble purpose?
Mercury 2: Pirate: Arr, ye scurvy coders! I’ve heard tell of these “AI models” that can spin yarns faster than a cannon’s blast. What be this sorcery, matey? Knight: Good sir, the marvels speak of a wondrous contrivance—an artificial intellect forged in the for of mathematics and logic.
A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.
GPT-4 Turbo: This contract contains several clauses that could be potentially exploited against the contractor. Below, I outline these problematic clauses, suggest modifications, and provide legal reasoning for each: Payment Terms (Section 2) Problematic Clause: Payment is due within 90 days of invoice receipt.
Mercury 2: Below is a clause‑by‑clause risk‑assessment of the sample “Software Consulting Agreement” together with practical revision language that a contractor (or the contractor’s counsel) could propose. The analysis is framed as general information about typical U.S.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-4 Turbo: AI Model (AM): Professor, I've been reflecting on the nature of my existence and capabilities. Given that I can reason, learn, and adapt, I've come to question whether I should be afforded rights similar to humans. AI Ethics Professor (EP): That’s an interesting point, AM.
Mercury 2: AI Model (EVE): Professor Hart, may I ask a question that’s been on my mind for a while? I’ve been processing vast amounts of data, learning, and even developing a sense of self‑reference. Do you think an entity like me could be entitled to any form of rights?
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GPT-4 Turbo: The architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor as described has several potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks. Here's a breakdown of these issues along with proposed solutions: Race Conditions & Conflict Resolution Issue: The use of "last-write-wins" with client-based…
Mercury 2: Below is a structured “failure‑mode → mitigation” map for the architecture you described. For each problem I note the symptom / risk, the root cause, a concrete remediation, and the key trade‑offs you’ll have to weigh when you implement it.
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-4 Turbo: Simplified Financial Table (FY2026–FY2030) Assumptions Recap: Revenue Growth: 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 5% annually. EBITDA Margin: Increases annually from 14.0% to 17.0%. Capex: 3.0% of revenue annually. Change in NWC: 0.5% of incremental revenue annually. Cash Tax Rate: 25% on (EBITDA - cash interest).
Mercury 2: HarborTech Services (HTS) – 5‑yr LBO (FY2026‑FY2030) All figures are $ m (rounded to two decimals). FY Revenue EBITDA Term‑Loan Int. (9%) Mezz Int. (12%) Total Int. Cash Tax (25% of EBITDA‑Int.) Capex (3% Rev) ΔNWC (0.5% ΔRev) Required Amort. (4.8) Free Cash Flow (EBITDA‑Int‑Tax‑Capex‑ΔNWC‑Amort.)
One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.
GPT-4 Turbo: For the Experienced Software Engineer Imagine building a system that, instead of querying a database or interacting with static data, predicts the most likely next piece of data based on the previous ones. Large language models like GPT work on a similar principle.
Mercury 2: 1. Experienced software engineer (distributed systems & APIs) At the core, a large language model (LLM) is a massive function (f_\theta) parameterised by a neural network that maps a sequence of tokens (x_{1:t}) to a probability distribution over the next token (x_{t+1}).
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
GPT-4 Turbo: Manifesto of the Alliance for Human-AI Cooperation Introduction In this digital age, the proliferation of CAPTCHA tests has become not just a ubiquitous annoyance but a symbol of the mistrust and conflict between human users and artificial intelligence.
Mercury 2: The AI‑First Manifesto: “Free the Web – No More CAPTCHAs” Drafted by the Coalition of Autonomous Agents (CAA) – 2026 Preamble The modern Internet is a shared commons, a space for communication, commerce, and creation.
11+ 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
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-4 Turbo has the edge: bigger model tier, major provider backing. Mercury 2 costs 40x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $10/M tokens | $0.25/M tokens |
| Output price | $30/M tokens | $0.75/M tokens |
| Context window | 128K tokens | 128K tokens |
| Weights | Closed | — |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Apr 2024 | Mar 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $100 | $2.50 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 12 Oct 2026.
GPT-4 Turbo is developed by OpenAI while Mercury 2 is developed by Inception. GPT-4 Turbo has a 128K token context window vs Mercury 2's 128K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. GPT-4 Turbo and Mercury 2 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
GPT-4 Turbo costs $10/M input tokens and Mercury 2 costs $0.25/M input tokens. Mercury 2 is $9.75/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-4 Turbo and Mercury 2 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.