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 2vsQwen3.7 Flash
Updated Jul 2026

Mercury 2vsQwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper than Mercury 2 at $0.03/M vs $0.25/M input tokens.

Mercury 2 and Qwen3.7 Flash compared across 13 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2Qwen3.7 Flash
Input price$0.25/M tokens$0.03/M tokens
Output price$0.75/M tokens$0.13/M tokens
Context window128K tokens1.0M tokens
Weights—Closed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Jul 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 13 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

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 21,934 words
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.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash1,240 words
This is a high-stakes crisis requiring decisive, legally compliant, ethically grounded, and strategically coordinated action. Below is a structured, hour-by-hour executive playbook for the next 48 hours, followed by cross-cutting rationale addressing your specified dimensions.
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 2291 words
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…
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash332 words
🥔 Golden Crunch Smash-Roasted Potatoes A crowd-pleasing side dish that delivers maximum crispiness with minimal effort. By boiling then smashing the potatoes before roasting, you create a shatteringly crisp crust while keeping the inside fluffy. This recipe relies on just seven pantry staples for perfect flavor.
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 22,132 words
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.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash1,322 words
This agreement contains several highly one-sided provisions that create significant legal, financial, and operational risks for the contractor. Below is a clause-by-clause analysis identifying exploitation risks, recommended modifications, and the underlying legal reasoning. Note: Contract law varies by jurisdiction.
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 2896 words
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}).
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash1,038 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer Think of an LLM’s training process less as “teaching” and more as optimizing a high-dimensional function across a petabyte-scale dataset, much like you’d architect a distributed system to handle massive throughput.
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 22,965 words
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.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash1,381 words
This counterfactual traces a plausible diffusion curve for an early transistor invention, acknowledging that while the underlying physics could be known in 1920, practical adoption would be constrained by materials science, precision manufacturing, and institutional readiness.
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Mercury 22,072 words
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.
Read the full answer
Qwen3.7 Flash1,067 words
Here’s a structured breakdown of the critical failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in the proposed architecture, along with targeted solutions and their trade-offs. 🔴 1.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Qwen3.7 Flash
Qwen3.7 Flash
Mercury 2
Mercury 2Runner-up

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Qwen3.7 Flash has the edge: bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.

Qwen3.7 Flash costs 5.8x less per token.

Slight edge
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Mercury 2
Input
$0.25
Output
$0.75
Qwen3.7 Flash
Input
$0.03
8.3× cheaper
Output
$0.13
5.8× cheaper

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper on both: 8.3× input, 5.8× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Mercury 21 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.25 in·$0.75 out·128k·100% up
Qwen3.7 Flash1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Alibaba Cloud$0.03 in·$0.13 out·1M·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 is developed by Inception while Qwen3.7 Flash is developed by Qwen. Mercury 2 has a 128K token context window vs Qwen3.7 Flash's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 13 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Mercury 2 and Qwen3.7 Flash each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 13 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Mercury 2 costs $0.25/M input tokens and Qwen3.7 Flash costs $0.03/M input tokens. Qwen3.7 Flash is $0.22/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 and Qwen3.7 Flash 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 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Mercury 2 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.7 Flash logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoHy3 logo
Mercury 2 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen3.7 Flash logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Mercury 2 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.7 Flash logoGLM 5.3 logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Mercury 2 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Qwen3.7 Flash logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Mercury 2 logoMercury logo
Mercury 2 vs MercuryVersion compare
Mercury 2 logoMercury 2.5 logo
Mercury 2 vs Mercury 2.5Same lab
Qwen3.7 Flash logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen3.7 Flash logoQwen3.8 Max (0902) logo
Qwen3.7 Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Same lab
Mercury 2 logoSeed 2.0 Lite logo
Mercury 2 vs Seed 2.0 LiteSame size
Mercury 2 logoSeed 2.1 Turbo logo
Mercury 2 vs Seed 2.1 TurboNew provider
Mercury 2 logoSherlock Dash Alpha logo
Mercury 2 vs Sherlock Dash AlphaNew provider
Mercury 2 logoSherlock Think Alpha logo
Mercury 2 vs Sherlock Think AlphaNew provider

Model pages

Mercury 2 logo
Mercury 253 outputs, specs and price
Qwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen3.7 Flash13 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