GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Mercury 2.5
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI or Mercury 2.5 by Inception? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) scores 8.4 points higher (20.7 vs 12.3) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($331 vs $218; both mid-range class). Pick GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mercury 2.5.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Mercury 2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 12.3 | −40.6% Mercury 2.5 is 40.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $218.11 | −34.2% Mercury 2.5 is 34.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 53.29s | 4.39s | −91.8% Mercury 2.5 is 91.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $0.25 / $0.75 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Mercury 2.5 vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 40.6% less intelligence, 34.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 91.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Mercury 2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)Mercury 2.5Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/mercury-2-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/mercury-2-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill