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 Max Thinking
Updated Sep 2026

Mercury 2.5vsQwen3 Max Thinking

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper than Qwen3 Max Thinking at $0.04/M vs $1.2/M input tokens.

Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking compared across 20 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2.5Qwen3 Max Thinking
Input price$0.04/M tokens$1.2/M tokens
Output price$0.15/M tokens$6/M tokens
Context window260K tokens262K tokens
Weights—Closed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Feb 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

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

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 Max Thinking1,156 words
The 1920 Transistor Counterfactual: A Plausible Alternate Timeline Through 1980 (Assumptions: A functional point-contact silicon-germanium hybrid transistor is patented in 1920 by a U.S. team at Western Electric (AT&T). U.S. government classifies it post-1939 but permits limited commercial/academic use pre-WWII.
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 Max Thinking288 words
🌰 Pantry Peanut Magic Noodles Sweet, savory, and ready before delivery arrives. No fresh produce, dairy, or meat required. ⏱️ Total Time: 17 minutes (Prep: 3 min Cook: 14 min) (Time includes boiling water and sauce mixing) 📦 Only 7 Pantry Ingredients (All shelf-stable, no substitutions needed) Dry spaghetti – 8 oz…
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…

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
Qwen3 Max Thinking994 words
⚠️ DISCLAIMER: This analysis is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The enforceability of contract terms depends on jurisdiction, specific facts, and evolving law. Contractor must consult qualified legal counsel before signing.
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 Max Thinking991 words
🌊 ARCTIC DAWN 🌊 A Michelin 3-Star Composition by Chef Élise Valère "Where the ice remembers the sea." 📜 CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE Arctic Dawn is a culinary elegy to the fragile Arctic ecosystem, conceived during a residency with Inuit elders and marine biologists in Svalbard.
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…

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
Qwen3 Max Thinking658 words
🌱 A Simple 30-Day Health & Longevity Starter Plan Designed for absolute beginners • No perfection. No extremes. Just consistent, joyful progress. 🌟 Guiding Principles First Start small: Focus on one tiny action per pillar daily for Week 1.
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…

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 Max Thinking646 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer You’re right to be skeptical—*next-token prediction* sounds trivial. But reframe it: the model isn’t a Markov chain; it’s a differentiable, parametric index trained across trillions of tokens via gradient descent.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Qwen3 Max Thinking

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

Mercury 2.5 costs 40x 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
30× cheaper
Output
$0.15
40× cheaper
Qwen3 Max Thinking
Input
$1.20
Output
$6.00

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper on both: 30× input, 40× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Mercury 2.51 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.04 in·$0.15 out·260k·100% up
Qwen3 Max Thinking1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$0.78 in·$3.90 out·262k·100% 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 Max Thinking is developed by Qwen. Mercury 2.5 has a 260K token context window vs Qwen3 Max Thinking's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 20 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3 Max Thinking 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.

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens and Qwen3 Max Thinking costs $1.2/M input tokens. Mercury 2.5 is $1.16/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 Max Thinking 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 Max Thinking logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoHy3 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 Max Thinking logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking 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 Max Thinking logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoGLM 5.3 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3 Max Thinking logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking 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 Max Thinking logoQwen3.5 397B A17B logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking vs Qwen3.5 397B A17BVersion compare
Qwen3 Max Thinking logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Mercury 2.5 logoSeed 2.0 Code logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Seed 2.0 CodeSame size
Mercury 2.5 logoSeed 2.0 Lite logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Seed 2.0 LiteNew provider
Mercury 2.5 logoSeed 2.1 Turbo logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Seed 2.1 TurboSame size
Mercury 2.5 logoSherlock Dash Alpha logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Sherlock Dash AlphaNew provider

Model pages

Mercury 2.5 logo
Mercury 2.520 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3 Max Thinking logo
Qwen3 Max Thinking58 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