Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Which is better for the money: Mercury 2 by Inception or Qwen3.7 Max 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 Max scores 18.7 points higher (29.5 vs 10.8) but costs 22× as much to run the benchmark ($2277 vs $105; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.7 Max when you need intelligence above 10.8, and Mercury 2 when 10.8 is enough.
| Metric | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 10.8 | 29.5 | +173.1% Qwen3.7 Max is 2.7× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $104.94 | $2,277.12 | +2069.9% Qwen3.7 Max is 22× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.65s | 16.67s | +150.7% Qwen3.7 Max is 150.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.75 | $2.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Qwen3.7 Max vs Mercury 2: 173.1% more intelligence, 2069.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 150.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mercury 2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) scores 37.80 for $94.1.
- Qwen3.7 Max is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Mercury 2Qwen3.7 MaxToday'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/qwen3-7-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mercury-2/qwen3-7-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill