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. Mercury 2.5vsQwen3 235B A22B 2507
Updated Sep 2026

Mercury 2.5vsQwen3 235B A22B 2507

Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is cheaper than Mercury 2.5 at $0.00015/M vs $0.04/M input tokens.

Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 compared across 18 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2.5Qwen3 235B A22B 2507
Input price$0.04/M tokens$0.00015/M tokens
Output price$0.15/M tokens$0.00085/M tokens
Context window260K tokens—
Weights—Open
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Jul 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 18 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…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507747 words
1. To the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical, Systems-Oriented) You’re right to be skeptical—on the surface, “predicting the next word” sounds like a glorified autocomplete. But think of it less as a single prediction and more as a high-dimensional state machine trained across petabytes of human-generated text.
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…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507207 words
Dish Name: Golden Garbanzo Drizzle A cozy, savory-spiced chickpea stew with a honey-lime finish — simple, satisfying, and ready in minutes. Ingredients (7 common pantry staples): 1 can (15 oz) chickpeas (garbanzo beans), drained and rinsed 1 can (15 oz) diced tomatoes (undrained) 2 tbsp olive oil 1 tsp ground cumin ½…
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…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507974 words
Dish Title: Ember & Petal – A Dialogue Between Earth and Sky Conceptual Narrative: Inspired by the elemental contrast between volcanic resurgence and alpine serenity, Ember & Petal explores the tension and harmony of opposing natural forces through taste, texture, and temperature.
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.…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507675 words
This pitch deck for MindMeld AI is compelling and ambitious, but three claims raise significant red flags in terms of credibility, plausibility, and investor due diligence. Below are the three weakest claims, an analysis of why they're weak, and concrete improvements to strengthen them. 1.
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…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 25071,424 words
If the transistor had been invented in 1920—27 years earlier than its actual 1947 debut—it would have catalyzed a technological revolution far ahead of schedule, profoundly altering the trajectory of the 20th century.
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…

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 25071,177 words
CEO Action Plan: The Next 48 Hours Balancing Ethics, Legal Duty, Patient Safety, and Business Sustainability Hour 0–6: Assess the Situation and Secure Critical Data Actions: Call Emergency Secure Meeting (Virtual) with Chief Medical Officer (CMO), Chief Scientific Officer (CSO), Head of Regulatory Affairs, and Lead…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507

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

Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 costs 176x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Mercury 2.5
Input
$0.04
Output
$0.15
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507
Input
$0.000
267× cheaper
Output
$0.001
176× cheaper

Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is cheaper on both: 267× input, 176× output.

Where to run it

10 hosts, cheapest first

Mercury 2.51 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.04 in·$0.15 out·260k·100% up
Qwen3 235B A22B 25079 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
GGMI Cloudfp8$0.09 in·$0.35 out·262k·98.6% upDDeepInfrafp8$0.09 in·$0.55 out·262k·97.9% upNNovitafp8$0.09 in·$0.58 out·131k·98.7% upPParasailfp8$0.14 in·$0.80 out·131k·99.8% upAlibaba Cloud$0.15 in·$0.60 out·131k·99.9% upVVenicefp8$0.15 in·$0.75 out·128k·98.3% up
3 more hostsFewer hosts
NNebiusfp8$0.20 in·$0.60 out·262k·94.2% upSStreamLake$0.21 in·$0.84 out·128k·98.9% upGoogle Vertex AI$0.22 in·$0.88 out·262k·99.7% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Mercury 2.5 is developed by Inception while Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is developed by Qwen. You can compare their actual outputs across 18 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 18 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 costs $0.00015/M input tokens. Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 is $0.04/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 Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 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

Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoHy3 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoGLM 5.3 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

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
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logoQwen3.8 Max (0902) logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Same lab
Mercury 2.5 logoClaude Sonnet 5 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Claude Sonnet 5Same size
Mercury 2.5 logoOpenAI Codex Mini logo
Mercury 2.5 vs OpenAI Codex MiniNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoCypher Alpha (free) logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Cypher Alpha (free)Same size
Mercury 2.5 logoDeepSeek V3.1 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V3.1New provider

Model pages

Mercury 2.5 logo
Mercury 2.520 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3 235B A22B 2507 logo
Qwen3 235B A22B 250736 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