GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) vs Mercury 2.5
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI or Mercury 2.5 by Inception? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)
Mercury 2.5 vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning): 63.3% less intelligence, 23.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 38.9% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) | Mercury 2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 33.5 | 12.3 | −63.3% Mercury 2.5 is 63.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $153.58 | $189.17 | +23.2% Mercury 2.5 is 23.2% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.76s | 4.13s | −38.9% Mercury 2.5 is 38.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.25 / $0.75 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
- Mercury 2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) scores 41.30 for $175.
GPT-6.1 Terra (Non-reasoning)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-6-1-terra-non-reasoning/mercury-2-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-non-reasoning/mercury-2-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill