Inception: Mercury vs Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Compare Inception: Mercury by Inception against Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking by Qwen, context windows of 32K vs 66K, tested across 54 shared challenges.
Our Verdict
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Inception: MercuryRunner-up
No community votes yet. On paper, Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking has the edge — bigger model tier, newer, bigger context window.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is 6.7x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Slight edge
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Inception: Mercury
Input
$10.00
Output
$10.00
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Input
$0.15
67× cheaper
Output
$1.50
6.7× cheaper
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking is cheaper on both — 67× input, 6.7× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
58%
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking uses 13.6x more emoji
Inception: Mercury
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
55%Vocabulary54%
40wSentence Length16w
0.39Hedging0.31
4.9Bold6.0
3.8Lists4.5
0.04Emoji0.58
1.04Headings0.88
0.03Transitions0.10
Based on 17 + 17 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
