Model comparison
Mercury 2 vs o3
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Mercury 2 #129 (Supported); o3 #138 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Mercury 2 and o3 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Mercury 2; 16 to o3.
Updated July 28, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Mercury 2 only
- 0
- o3 only
- 16
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Mercury 2 and o3 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Mercury 2 yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
o3 is priced at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.25 input / $0.75 output per 1M tokens for Mercury 2. o3 has the larger context window at 200K, compared with 128K for Mercury 2.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Mercury 2 | o3 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Mercury 2$0.25 input / $0.75 output | o3$2 input / $8 output | Mercury 2 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Mercury 2789 tok/s | o3118 tok/s | Mercury 2 has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Mercury 23.88 s | o35.38 s | Mercury 2 reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Mercury 2128K | o3200K | o3 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 80.7% | Not comparable |
Coding1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 41.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 30.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 82.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 20.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -15.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 38.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 87.1% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | o3 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 71.4% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Mercury 2 and o3 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Mercury 2 and o3 today?
Mercury 2: $0.25 input / $0.75 output per 1M tokens o3: $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.