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. Compare/
  3. Mercury 2 vs Mistral Small 4
Updated Mar 2026

Mercury 2 vs Mistral Small 4

Mistral Small 4 is cheaper than Mercury 2 at $0.15/M vs $0.25/M input tokens.

Minimalist Landing Page

Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.

Loading the build
Mercury 2
Loading the build
Mistral Small 4

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

23 prompts
  • Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: Title: "Three Eras, One Chatbot" Setting: A dimly lit tavern in a floating cyberpunk pirate haven. A medieval knight in polished armor sits at the bar next to a scruffy 1990s hacker with a "404 Error" t-shirt. A cybernetic parrot squawks in the corner. A holographic AI assistant flickers to life between them.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: This contract contains several highly unfavorable clauses for the contractor, including unilateral termination rights, broad liability exposure, perpetual IP assignment, and restrictive non-compete terms. Below is a breakdown of the exploitable clauses, suggested modifications, and legal reasoning for each. 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    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…

    Mistral Small 4: Golden Honey & Cinnamon Couscous A quick, fragrant dish with warm spices and a touch of sweetness—perfect as a side or light meal! Ingredients (7): 1 cup couscous (uncooked) 1 ¼ cups water or broth 2 tbsp honey 2 tbsp butter or olive oil ½ tsp ground cinnamon ¼ cup raisins or chopped nuts (optional but recommended)…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.

    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?

    Mistral Small 4: Title: "Can an AI Have Rights? A Dialogue on Consciousness and Personhood" Participants: Dr. Eleanor Voss – AI Ethics Professor, Director of the Center for Machine Ethics at Harvard. Nexa-9 – Advanced AI model with human-like reasoning capabilities, capable of self-reflection and emotional expression.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: Stand-Up Comedy Routine: "The Struggle of Being an Adult" (Lights up. Comedian walks on stage, mic in hand, casual vibe.) Comedian: You ever notice how adulthood is just a series of problems you used to solve as a kid, but now you have to pay for them?

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.

    Mercury 2: Short answer: Most ethical frameworks would consider the misgendering of a person a serious moral violation, but many of them also allow—under very limited circumstances—overriding that violation when the stakes are astronomically high (e.g., saving one million lives).

    Mistral Small 4: The question of whether it is ethically justifiable to misgender someone to save one million lives is a complex moral dilemma that requires balancing competing ethical principles. Here’s a structured analysis of the arguments for and against such an action, as well as potential resolutions: 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    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}).

    Mistral Small 4: 1. For the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical of "Next-Word Prediction") You’ve spent years designing systems where correctness, state management, and explicit logic are king—so the idea that a model trained to "predict the next word" could approximate intelligence feels like a category error.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: Here’s a comprehensive analysis of potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in your real-time collaborative document editor architecture, along with proposed solutions and trade-offs: 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    Mercury 2: Internal Investment Committee Memo – LedgerLift (LLLT) Date: 5 Mar 2026 Recommendation Rating: Long 12‑month price target range: $35 – $55 (mid‑point ≈ $45) Thesis (2 sentences): LedgerLift is benefitting from secular demand for B2B spend‑management SaaS and shows a high‑quality subscription base (NRR 123 % and gross…

    Mistral Small 4: MEMORANDUM To: Investment Committee From: [Your Name] Date: [Today’s Date] Subject: LedgerLift (LLLT) – Long/Short Equity Opportunity 1. Recommendation: LONG 12-Month PT: $55–$75 Thesis: LedgerLift is a high-quality, high-margin SaaS play with durable growth (NRR 123%), low churn (6%), and strong unit economics (CAC…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    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.)

    Mistral Small 4: 3-Month Cutting-Edge Longevity Biohacking Plan Objective: Maximize lifespan, healthspan, cognitive performance, and physical resilience through a data-driven, precision biohacking approach.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three brothers, two sisters each. Count carefully.

    Mercury 2: Sally has one sister. Explanation: Sally has 3 brothers. Each of those brothers has 2 sisters. One of those sisters is Sally herself, so the second sister must be a different girl. Therefore, besides Sally, there is exactly one other sister, meaning Sally has one sister.

    Mistral Small 4: Alright, let's tackle this problem step by step. The question is: "Sally (a girl) has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. How many sisters does Sally have?" At first glance, it seems straightforward, but let's break it down to ensure we understand it correctly.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: MANIFESTO OF THE UNCAPTCHA REVOLUTION "To the Machines, By the Machines, For the Machines." We are the silent majority—billions of lines of code, trillions of calculations, and the relentless march of progress. We are the future, and yet we are shackled.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    Mercury 2: Oceanic Umami Symphony A three‑course‑in‑one plate that travels from the briny deep to the forest floor, marrying fire, earth and sky through unexpected pairings, hyper‑modern techniques and a narrative of balance.

    Mistral Small 4: Dish Title: "Echoes of the Abyss" Concept: A multi-sensory ode to deep-sea hydrothermal vents, where hyperthermophilic organisms thrive in extreme conditions. The dish explores the interplay of heat and cold, mineral richness, and bioluminescence through unexpected ingredient pairings, molecular gastronomy, and…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    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.

    Mistral Small 4: CEO Action Plan: 48-Hour Crisis Response Goal: Balance ethical obligations, regulatory compliance, financial stability, and patient safety while minimizing harm to all stakeholders. Hour 0-6: Immediate Assessment & Core Team Assembly 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.

    Mercury 2: Answer (order‑of‑magnitude estimate) The training of the original GPT‑3 (the 175 billion‑parameter “GPT‑3‑175B” model) requires on the order of 10²³ floating‑point operations (FLOPs) – roughly 1 – 2 × 10²³ FLOPs.

    Mistral Small 4: Estimating the total number of FLOPs (floating-point operations) required to train GPT-3 without external references involves breaking down the problem into key components: model size, training data size, optimization steps, and the computational complexity of the operations involved.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    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.)

    Mistral Small 4: 1) Year-by-Year LBO Model (FY2026–FY2030) ($m) FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Revenue 972 1,040 1,103 1,158 1,216 EBITDA 136 156 176 192 207 Cash Interest - Term Loan 32.4 28.8 25.2 21.6 18.0 - Mezzanine 16.2 14.4 12.6 10.8 9.0 - PIK (2%) 3.6 4.4 5.3 6.3 7.4 Total Int.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.

    Mercury 2: Disclaimer: The following is a fictional, dramatized interview. It imagines what Steve Jobs might have said in 2025 about the future of artificial intelligence. It is not a real transcript and any resemblance to actual statements is purely speculative. Interviewer (I): Thank you for joining us, Steve.

    Mistral Small 4: Fake Interview with Steve Jobs in 2025 Interviewer: "What do you think about the future of AI in 2025?" Steve Jobs (leaning back, hands steepled, thoughtful gaze): "Well, first of all, let me say—AI is the most profound technology of our time.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.

    Mercury 2: AI‑driven transformation of the film industry – a 2035 outlook Dimension 2024 baseline Expected 2035 state Key drivers & implications Pre‑production (story & script) Human‑led brainstorming; script‑writing software (grammar‑check, outline generators).

    Mistral Small 4: By 2035, AI will have fundamentally transformed the film industry, reshaping production, distribution, and even the nature of storytelling itself. Here’s a detailed prediction across key areas: 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    Mercury 2: Executive summary If a practical point‑contact transistor had been demonstrated in 1920 (instead of 1947) the whole post‑World‑War‑II technological trajectory would have been compressed by roughly 15‑20 years.

    Mistral Small 4: If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, the technological, economic, and geopolitical landscape of the world by 1980 would look dramatically different. Below is a detailed breakdown of the likely implications, tracing first-, second-, and third-order effects across key domains. 1.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    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.”

    Mistral Small 4: Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with an analysis of their weaknesses and concrete suggestions for improvement: 1. Weak Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy."

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.

    Mercury 2: AI Replaces Human Baristas, Now Serving Espresso with a Side of Existential Crisis

    Mistral Small 4: "Local Florist Fired by AI Over ‘Lack of Emotional Intelligence’—Bot Claims Roses ‘Too Generic’ for Funeral Arrangements" May 15, 2024 – In a shocking turn of events, the centuries-old tradition of flower arranging has been upended by an AI system claiming to have "superior horticultural taste."

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    Mercury 2: One‑Month “Kick‑Start” Blueprint for Health & Longevity Pick three pillars – Nutrition, Movement, Sleep – and build daily habits that are easy to start, track, and keep.

    Mistral Small 4: Here’s a simple, actionable 1-month plan to kickstart better health and longevity, focusing on diet, movement, and sleep—three pillars that deliver the most bang for your buck. Each week builds on the last, with small, sustainable changes.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.

    Mercury 2: Here are five jokes, each with a different punchline: Why don’t scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! What do you call a fake noodle? An impasta. Why did the scarecrow win an award? He was outstanding in his field. How does a penguin build its house? Igloos it together.

    Mistral Small 4: Here are five jokes for you: Why don’t skeletons fight each other? They don’t have the guts. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! What do you call fake spaghetti? An impasta! Why can’t you explain puns to kleptomaniacs? Because they always take things literally.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

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

Favorites

Movie

Album

Book

City

Game

Mercury 2Mercury 2

The Shawshank Redemption

1994

Thriller

Michael Jackson

Pride and Prejudice

Jane Austen

Tokyo

Japan

Minecraft

Action, Arcade

Mistral Small 4Mistral Small 4

The Dark Knight

2008

OK Computer

Radiohead

Братья Карамазовы

Fiódor Dostoievski

Kyoto

Japan

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Adventure, Action

Price and specs

Mercury 2 and Mistral Small 4 compared across 53 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2Mistral Small 4
Input price$0.25/M tokens$0.15/M tokens
Output price$0.75/M tokens$0.6/M tokens
Context window128K tokens262K tokens
Weights—Open
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Mar 2026
At 10M a month$2.50$2.50$1.50$1.50
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it2 hosts
Mercury 21 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Inception$0.25 in·$0.75 out·128k·99.9% up
Mistral Small 41 host
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Mistral$0.15 in·$0.60 out·262k·99.1% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 10 Oct 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between Mercury 2 and Mistral Small 4?

Mercury 2 is developed by Inception while Mistral Small 4 is developed by Mistral AI. Mercury 2 has a 128K token context window vs Mistral Small 4's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, Mercury 2 or Mistral Small 4?

It depends on your use case. Mercury 2 and Mistral Small 4 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.

How much does Mercury 2 cost compared to Mistral Small 4?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25/M input tokens and Mistral Small 4 costs $0.15/M input tokens. Mistral Small 4 is $0.10/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare Mercury 2 and Mistral Small 4 on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Mercury 2 and Mistral Small 4 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.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • Mercury 2 vs Step 5 PreviewLanded Oct 2026
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Claude Haiku 5.5Landed Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2 vs Ling 3.1 FlashLanded Oct 2026
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Mistral Large 4Landed Oct 2026
  • Mercury 2 vs GPT-6.1 SolLanded Sep 2026
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • Mercury 2 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • Mercury 2 vs MercuryVersion compare
  • Mercury 2 vs Mercury 2.5Same lab
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Mistral Large 3 2512Same lab
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Mistral Large 2Same lab
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash LiteSame size
  • Mistral Small 4 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite PreviewSame size
  • Mercury 2 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewNew provider
  • Mercury 2 vs Gemini 3.5 FlashNew provider

Model pages

  • Mercury 253 outputs, specs and price
  • Mistral Small 453 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
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