Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Mercury 2.5
Which is better for the money: Kimi K3.1 Pro by Kimi 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
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 42.8 points higher (55.1 vs 12.3) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($3117 vs $218; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Kimi K3.1 Pro when you need intelligence above 12.3, and Mercury 2.5 when 12.3 is enough.
| Metric | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Mercury 2.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 55.1 | 12.3 | −77.7% Mercury 2.5 is 77.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,117.31 | $218.11 | −93.0% Mercury 2.5 is 93.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 42.64s | 4.39s | −89.7% Mercury 2.5 is 89.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $10.0 | $0.25 / $0.75 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Mercury 2.5 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro: 77.7% less intelligence, 93.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 89.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Kimi K3.1 Pro is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Mercury 2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Kimi K3.1 ProMercury 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/kimi-k3-1-pro/mercury-2-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/kimi-k3-1-pro/mercury-2-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill