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 2.5vsQwen3.8 Max Prime
Updated Sep 2026

Mercury 2.5vsQwen3.8 Max Prime

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper than Qwen3.8 Max Prime at $0.04/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2.5Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Input price$0.04/M tokens$4/M tokens
Output price$0.15/M tokens$12/M tokens
Context window260K tokens1.0M tokens
Weights—Closed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime1,147 words
For the Software Engineer Think of it this way: you've built systems where simple rules at the node level produce emergent behavior at the system level — consensus protocols, eventual consistency, cellular automata-like patterns in distributed state machines. An LLM is a similar phenomenon at a different scale.
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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime223 words
🍯 Golden Hour Noodles A sweet, savory, garlicky pasta that tastes like it took way more effort than it did. Ingredients (7) # Ingredient Amount 1 Spaghetti 8 oz (half a box) 2 Butter 3 tablespoons 3 Garlic, minced 4 cloves 4 Honey 2 tablespoons 5 Soy sauce 1 tablespoon 6 Red pepper flakes ½ teaspoon 7 Parmesan cheese…
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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime2,943 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual History Through 1980 Preamble: The Invention Itself The transistor's actual invention required quantum mechanical understanding of semiconductor behavior. In 1920, this theory didn't yet exist.
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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime834 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch The TAM Calculation (Slide 4) The Claim: "We're targeting the 3.5 billion smartphone users worldwide. TAM: $180B." Why it's weak: This is a textbook example of TAM inflation that will immediately erode investor trust.
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) –…

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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime673 words
HarborTech Services (HTS) – LBO Underwriting Memo Entry & Capital Structure Item Amount FY2025 EBITDA $120.0m Entry Multiple 12.0x Enterprise Value $1,440.0m Transaction Fees (2.0% of EV) $28.8m Total Uses $1,468.8m Term Loan (4.0x, 9.0% cash, 1.0% amort) $480.0m Mezzanine (1.5x, 12.0% cash + 2.0% PIK) $180.0m Sponsor…
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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime1,844 words
"Petrichor" The Forest Floor After Rain Conceptual Narrative Petrichor — from the Greek petra (stone) and ichor (the fluid that flows in the veins of the gods) — is the scent produced when rain falls on dry earth.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Mercury 2.5
Mercury 2.5
Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Qwen3.8 Max Prime

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

Mercury 2.5 costs 80x 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
100× cheaper
Output
$0.15
80× cheaper
Qwen3.8 Max Prime
Input
$4.00
Output
$12.00

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper on both: 100× input, 80× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Mercury 2.51 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.04 in·$0.15 out·260k·99.9% up
Qwen3.8 Max Prime1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$4.00 in·$12.00 out·1M·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Mercury 2.5 is developed by Inception while Qwen3.8 Max Prime is developed by Qwen. Mercury 2.5 has a 260K token context window vs Qwen3.8 Max Prime's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Mercury 2.5 costs $0.04/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 Max Prime costs $4/M input tokens. Mercury 2.5 is $3.96/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 Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3.8 Max Prime 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 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoCommand A+ logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Mercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs GPT-6 LunaLanded 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
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashSame lab
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime vs Qwen3.7 FlashSame lab
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20 logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.5 Plus 2026-04-20Cross-provider
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.6 27B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.6 27BCross-provider
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.6 35B A3B logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.6 35B A3BCross-provider
Mercury 2.5 logoQwen3.6 Flash logo
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.6 FlashCross-provider

Model pages

Mercury 2.5 logo
Mercury 2.520 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Qwen3.8 Max Prime19 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