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 2vsSolar Mini 4
Updated Sep 2026

Mercury 2vsSolar Mini 4

Solar Mini 4 is cheaper than Mercury 2 at $0.05/M vs $0.25/M input tokens.

Mercury 2 and Solar Mini 4 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecMercury 2Solar Mini 4
Input price$0.25/M tokens$0.05/M tokens
Output price$0.75/M tokens$0.2/M tokens
Context window128K tokens524K tokens
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedMar 2026Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Mercury 2736 words
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.)
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,718 words
518.51935 New TL: 276.34682 - 86.82747 = 189.51935 Mezz: PIK 194.8377888 * 0.02 = 3.896755776 New Mezz: 194.8377888 + 3.896755776 = 198.734544576 Ending Balances: TL: 189.52 Mezz: 198.73 Total Debt: 388.25 Exit (End of FY2030): Exit EBITDA: 206.6252668 Exit Multiple: 10.5x Exit EV: 206.6252668 * 10.5 = 2,169.5653014…
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
Solar Mini 41,165 words
Here’s a systematic breakdown of the architectural weaknesses, failure modes, and scaling bottlenecks in your design, along with specific solutions and their trade-offs. Real-Time Synchronization & WebSocket Affinity Issue: Round-robin load balancing is stateless, but WebSockets are stateful and long-lived.
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
Solar Mini 41,994 words
This agreement contains several provisions that are heavily one-sided, overly broad, or legally vulnerable. Below is a clause-by-clause analysis of the most exploitable terms, suggested modifications, and the legal reasoning behind them. Note: Contract law varies significantly by jurisdiction.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Mercury 22,100 words
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.)
Read the full answer
Solar Mini 41,388 words
🧬 3-Month Biohacker Longevity & Performance Optimization Plan ⚠️ Important Disclaimer: This protocol is for informational and educational purposes. It is not medical advice. Always consult a licensed healthcare provider before starting new supplements, fasting regimens, intense exercise, or neurofeedback protocols.
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
Solar Mini 4266 words
🌟 Golden Chickpea & Rice Skillet This comforting one-pot dish combines hearty chickpeas, tender rice, and a warm blend of spices. It's a perfect way to use up pantry staples for a quick, flavorful meal.
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
Solar Mini 4893 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer From a systems architecture perspective, the skepticism that "predicting the next word" yields intelligence is understandable, but it stems from viewing the model through a deterministic, code-based lens rather than a probabilistic, distributed-systems lens.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Mercury 2
Mercury 2
Solar Mini 4
Solar Mini 4

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

Solar Mini 4 costs 3.8x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Mercury 2
Input
$0.25
Output
$0.75
Solar Mini 4
Input
$0.05
5.0× cheaper
Output
$0.20
3.8× cheaper

Solar Mini 4 is cheaper on both: 5.0× input, 3.8× output.

Where to run it

2 hosts

Mercury 21 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Inception$0.25 in·$0.75 out·128k·100% up
Solar Mini 41 host
HostInOutContextUptime
UUpstage$0.05 in·$0.20 out·524k·100% 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 is developed by Inception while Solar Mini 4 is developed by Upstage. Mercury 2 has a 128K token context window vs Solar Mini 4's 524K. 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 and Solar Mini 4 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 costs $0.25/M input tokens and Solar Mini 4 costs $0.05/M input tokens. Solar Mini 4 is $0.20/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 Solar Mini 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.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Mercury 2 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoCommand A+ logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoClaude Opus 5.5 logo
Mercury 2 vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Mercury 2 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Mercury 2 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Solar Mini 4 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Solar Mini 4 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded 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
Solar Mini 4 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Solar Pro 4Same lab
Solar Mini 4 logoSolar Pro 3 logo
Solar Mini 4 vs Solar Pro 3Same lab
Mercury 2 logoGPT-5.1 Chat logo
Mercury 2 vs GPT-5.1 ChatNew provider
Mercury 2 logoGPT-5.1-Codex logo
Mercury 2 vs GPT-5.1-CodexNew provider
Mercury 2 logoGPT-5.1 Codex Max logo
Mercury 2 vs GPT-5.1 Codex MaxNew provider
Mercury 2 logoGPT-5.1-Codex-Mini logo
Mercury 2 vs GPT-5.1-Codex-MiniNew provider

Model pages

Mercury 2 logo
Mercury 253 outputs, specs and price
Solar Mini 4 logo
Solar Mini 419 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