Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Which is better for the money: Mercury 2.5 by Inception or Qwen3.7 Plus by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Qwen3.7 Plus scores 12.9 points higher (25.2 vs 12.3) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($428 vs $218; both mid-range class). Pick Qwen3.7 Plus when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mercury 2.5.
| Metric | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3.7 Plus | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 12.3 | 25.2 | +104.9% Qwen3.7 Plus is 2.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $218.11 | $427.73 | +96.1% Qwen3.7 Plus is 96.1% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.33s | 46.21s | +967.2% Qwen3.7 Plus is 967.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.75 | $0.40 / $1.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.7 Plus vs Mercury 2.5: 104.9% more intelligence, 96.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 967.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mercury 2.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Mercury 2.5Qwen3.7 PlusToday'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/mercury-2-5/qwen3-7-plus · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mercury-2-5/qwen3-7-plus?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill