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-5.5vsMercury 2.5
Updated Sep 2026

GPT-5.5vsMercury 2.5

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper than GPT-5.5 at $0.04/M vs $5/M input tokens.

GPT-5.5 and Mercury 2.5 compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecGPT-5.5Mercury 2.5
Input price$5/M tokens$0.04/M tokens
Output price$30/M tokens$0.15/M tokens
Context window1.1M tokens260K tokens
WeightsClosed—
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedApr 2026Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

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

Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)

You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B…

GPT-5.51,055 words
LedgerLift (LLLT) IC Memo — Fictional Recommendation: Pass / Watchlist Current price: $46 Market cap: $8.7B; EV: $7.3B after $1.4B net cash 12-month fair value range: $40–$50/share Thesis, 2 sentences: LedgerLift is a high-quality mid-market spend management/AP automation SaaS asset with 92% subscription revenue, 123%…
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5735 words
To: Investment Committee From: Equity Research Date: September 22, 2026 Subject: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Initiation of Coverage Recommendation & Thesis Recommendation: Long 12-Month Price Target: $55 – $68 Thesis: LedgerLift offers a rare combination of high-quality SaaS unit economics (NRR 123%, CAC payback 18mo) and…
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-5.51,010 words
For an experienced software engineer A large language model is best thought of as a huge learned function: A “token” is usually a word fragment, not necessarily a full word. During training, the model is shown trillions of tokens of text and repeatedly asked: “given this prefix, what token came next?”
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…

GPT-5.53,386 words
A transistor invented in 1920 would not simply move the entire digital age back by 27 years. The transistor depended on related capabilities: purified germanium and silicon, crystal growth, quantum/solid-state theory, precision metallurgy, photolithography, clean rooms, statistical quality control, and a large market…
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

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-5.5519 words
Weak claim Why it’s weak How to strengthen it 1. “Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device.” This is the biggest technical red flag.
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

Mini LBO Underwrite

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

GPT-5.5563 words
Key assumptions Entry closes at end of FY2025; exit at end of FY2030. Interest is calculated on beginning-of-year debt balances. Term Loan amortization = 1.0% of original Term Loan principal = $4.8m/year. Mezz PIK = 2.0% of beginning-of-year Mezz balance, added to principal annually.
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

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

GPT-5.51,719 words
Dish: “Moon Tide” — Koji-Cured Diver Scallop, Roasted Sunchoke, White Chocolate–Miso Beurre Blanc, Green Strawberry, Sea Lettuce Glass & Caviar Conceptual narrative “Moon Tide” is built around the meeting point of sea, soil, and orchard.
Read the full answer
Mercury 2.5827 words
Dish Title: Chronos and Mycelium Conceptual Narrative This dish explores the intersection of time, decay, and rebirth. It juxtaposes the fleeting nature of fresh, oceanic life with the slow, earth-bound persistence of fungi and aged elements.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
GPT-5.5
GPT-5.5
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-5.5 has the edge: bigger model tier, bigger context window, major provider backing.

Mercury 2.5 costs 200x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

GPT-5.5
Input
$5.00
Output
$30.00
Mercury 2.5
Input
$0.04
125× cheaper
Output
$0.15
200× cheaper

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper on both: 125× input, 200× output.

Where to run it

4 hosts, cheapest first

GPT-5.53 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Azure AI Foundry$5.00 in·$30.00 out·1.1M·100% upOpenAI$5.00 in·$30.00 out·1.1M·100% upAmazon Bedrock$5.50 in·$33.00 out·1.1M—
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-5.5 is developed by OpenAI while Mercury 2.5 is developed by Inception. GPT-5.5 has a 1.1M 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-5.5 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-5.5 costs $5/M input tokens and Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens. Mercury 2.5 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.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-5.5 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-5.5 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
GPT-5.5 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-5.5 logoHy3 logo
GPT-5.5 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
GPT-5.5 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
GPT-5.5 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
GPT-5.5 logoGLM 5.3 logo
GPT-5.5 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-5.5 logoGPT-6 Astra Pro logo
GPT-5.5 vs GPT-6 Astra ProSame lab
GPT-5.5 logoGPT-6 Astra logo
GPT-5.5 vs GPT-6 AstraSame 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 logoHorizon Beta logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Horizon BetaSame size
Mercury 2.5 logoHunter Alpha logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Hunter AlphaNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoHy4 Preview logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Hy4 PreviewNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoInkling logo
Mercury 2.5 vs InklingNew provider

Model pages

GPT-5.5 logo
GPT-5.558 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