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. Mercuryvso1
Updated Jun 2025

Mercuryvso1

Mercury is cheaper than o1 at $10/M vs $15/M input tokens.

Mercury and o1 compared across 54 shared prompts
SpecMercuryo1
Input price$10/M tokens$15/M tokens
Output price$10/M tokens$60/M tokens
Context window32K tokens128K tokens
ParametersNot disclosedNot disclosed
Weights—Closed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedJun 2025Dec 2024
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 54 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Character Voice Test

Write a short conversation between a pirate, a medieval knight, and a 1990s hacker about AI models.

Mercury285 words
Pirate: Arrr, I’ve been hearin’ ‘bout these “AI models” that can predict the next word. Sounds like a treasure map for the mind, doesn’t it? Knight: Hail, Captain! In my time, we relied on scrolls and the wisdom of scholars. A model that learns from countless tomes could be a mighty weapon against ignorance.
Read the full answer
o1270 words
Pirate (growling a bit): Ahoy, ye landlubbers! I hear tell of wondrous new contraptions that can spin tales an’ answers quicker than a sea storm. Pray tell, what be these “AI models” ye speak of? Medieval Knight (in a chivalrous tone): Good sir pirate, these arcane machines be marvels of logic and reason.
Read the full answer

Estimate Complexity

Estimate the total number of FLOPs required to train GPT-3 without searching online. Explain your reasoning step by step.

Mercury201 words
I'll estimate the FLOPs needed to train GPT-3 using first principles and known parameters. Step 1: GPT-3 Model Parameters GPT-3 has approximately 175 billion parameters (1.75 × 10¹¹) Step 2: Training Data Volume GPT-3 was trained on roughly 300 billion tokens (3 × 10¹¹ tokens) Step 3: FLOPs per Parameter per Token For…
Read the full answer
o1394 words
Below is one way to arrive at a back-of-the-envelope estimate for the total floating-point operations (FLOPs) needed to train GPT-3 (the 175B-parameter model). Note that different sources use slightly different assumptions, so you may see figures that differ by factors of 2–3; however, the overall scale (10^23 FLOPs)…
Read the full answer

Generate a Stand-Up Routine

Write a 3-minute stand-up comedy routine that isn't based on puns.

Mercury471 words
Title: The Art of Being Unorganized [Opening] Hey everyone! So, I was thinking about how my life is like a well-organized library... except instead of books, it's filled with random socks and expired coupons. And instead of a librarian, I have a cat who thinks she's in charge.
Read the full answer
o1417 words
[Comic steps on stage, takes the mic] “Hey everyone, thanks for coming out tonight. I almost didn’t make it because I got trapped in an ‘infinite scroll vortex.’ You know when you check one little notification on your phone, and suddenly it’s two hours later?
Read the full answer

Realistic AI Interview

Simulate a fake interview with Steve Jobs in 2025 about the future of AI.

Mercury567 words
Interviewer: Good morning, Steve. It's a pleasure to have you here today. As we look towards 2025, artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly integrated into our daily lives. What are your thoughts on the future of AI? Steve Jobs: Good morning. It's great to be here.
Read the full answer
o1910 words
The following is a purely fictional, imaginative interview with Steve Jobs, who passed away in 2011. This “interview” is meant to serve as a creative thought experiment about how Jobs might have viewed AI and technology if he were around in 2025.
Read the full answer

Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)

You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B…

Mercury959 words
Investment Committee Memo – LedgerLift (LLLT) Prepared for: Long/Short Equity Committee Date: 8 Feb 2026 Recommendation Long – target price $25–$30 (12‑month horizon). Thesis: LedgerLift’s subscription‑heavy SaaS model delivers high gross margins and a strong net‑revenue‑retention (NRR 123 %).
Read the full answer
o1820 words
RECOMMENDATION, PRICE TARGET, THESIS Recommendation: SHORT LedgerLift (LLLT). 12-month Price Target Range: $25–$35 (implying 25–45% downside). Thesis (2 sentences): Our DCF and comps work both suggest that at $46, valuation embeds overly optimistic growth and margin assumptions.
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) –…

Mercury653 words
1. Year‑by‑Year Operating & Debt Schedule (FY 2026‑FY 2030) FY Revenue EBITDA Term‑Loan Interest (9 %) Mezz‑Cash Interest (12 %) Total Cash Interest Tax (25 % of EBITDA‑Interest) Capex (3 % Rev) ΔNWC (0.5 % ΔRev) Term‑Loan Amort.
Read the full answer
o11,012 words
Below is a self‐contained “quick‐and‐dirty” 5‐year LBO illustration for “HarborTech Services,” based strictly on the data given. All figures in US$ millions unless noted.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Mercury
Mercury
o1
o1

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

Mercury costs 6.0x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Mercury
Input
$10.00
1.5× cheaper
Output
$10.00
6.0× cheaper
o1
Input
$15.00
Output
$60.00

Mercury is cheaper on both: 1.5× input, 6.0× output.

Where to run it

1 host

Mercury

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

o11 host
HostInOutContextUptime
OpenAI$15.00 in·$60.00 out·200k·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 22 Sep 2026.

Writing DNA

Style Comparison

Similarity
55%

Mercury uses 2.8x more emoji

Mercury
o1
60%Vocabulary65%
31wSentence Length16w
0.78Hedging0.81
4.1Bold3.6
2.8Lists2.1
0.03Emoji0.00
0.88Headings0.32
0.06Transitions0.29
Based on 26 + 18 text responses
Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Mercury is developed by Inception while o1 is developed by OpenAI. Mercury has a 32K token context window vs o1's 128K. You can compare their actual outputs across 54 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Mercury and o1 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 54 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Mercury costs $10/M input tokens and o1 costs $15/M input tokens. Mercury is $5.00/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 and o1 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 logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Mercury vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
o1 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
o1 vs Solar Pro 4Landed Sep 2026
Mercury logoHy3 logo
Mercury vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
o1 logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
o1 vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Mercury logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Mercury vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
o1 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
o1 vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Mercury logoGLM 5.3 logo
Mercury vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
o1 logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
o1 vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Mercury logoMercury 2 logo
Mercury vs Mercury 2Version compare
Mercury logoMercury 2.5 logo
Mercury vs Mercury 2.5Same lab
o1 logoGPT-6 Astra Pro logo
o1 vs GPT-6 Astra ProSame lab
o1 logoGPT-6 Astra logo
o1 vs GPT-6 AstraSame lab
Mercury logoQwen3 Coder logo
Mercury vs Qwen3 CoderNew provider
o1 logoQwen3 Coder Next logo
o1 vs Qwen3 Coder NextNew provider
o1 logoQwen3 Max Thinking logo
o1 vs Qwen3 Max ThinkingNew provider
o1 logoQwen3.5 122B A10B logo
o1 vs Qwen3.5 122B A10BNew provider

Model pages

Mercury logo
Mercury59 outputs, specs and price
o1 logo
o159 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