Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Omni Flash
Price, context window & benchmark comparison
VS
Compare different models
Verdict: Mercury 2.5 is 3.4× cheaper than Qwen3.8 Omni Flash on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Qwen3.8 Omni Flash has the larger context window (1M vs 260K).
| Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $0.04 | $0.15 |
| Output price / 1M | $0.15 | $0.47 |
| Blended price (3:1) | $0.0675 | $0.23 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.004 | $0.016 |
| Context window | 260K | 1M |
| Max output | 66K | 131K |
| Intelligence index | — | — |
| Coding index | — | — |
| Providers | — | 1 |
| Best provider uptime (30m) | — | 100.0% |
| Vision input | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2026-09-21 |
| Retirement | — | — |
Cost calculator
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Qwen3.8 Omni Flash?
Mercury 2.5 is 3.4× cheaper than Qwen3.8 Omni Flash on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Omni Flash: which has a bigger context window?
Mercury 2.5: 260,000 tokens. Qwen3.8 Omni Flash: 1,000,000 tokens.
How much would 1 million requests cost?
At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Mercury 2.5 ≈ $155.00, Qwen3.8 Omni Flash ≈ $535.00.
More comparisons
Mercury 2.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeMercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeMercury 2.5 vs Command A+Mercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 Luna ProMercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 LunaMercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProMercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 SolMercury 2.5 vs Claude Opus 5.5Mercury 2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedMercury 2.5 vs MiMo-V2.6-FlashMercury 2.5 vs Grok 4.7Mercury 2.5 vs GLM 5.3 FlashXMercury 2.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 FlashMercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 AstraMercury 2.5 vs GPT-6 Astra ProMercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Qwen3.8 Omni Flash vs GLM 5.3 PrimeQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs Command A+Qwen3.8 Omni Flash vs GPT-6 Luna ProQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs GPT-6 LunaQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs GPT-6 Sol ProQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs GPT-6 SolQwen3.8 Omni Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5