Mercury 2 vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Mercury 2 by Inception or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Mercury 2
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Mercury 2: 12.2% less intelligence, 212.0% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 20.8% slower end-to-end.
| Metric | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.5 | 10.1 | −12.2% Qwen3 Coder Next is 12.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $152.55 | $476.03 | +212.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 3.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.57s | 5.52s | +20.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 20.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.75 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Mercury 2 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5-Pro scores 26.40 for $138.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Mercury 2Qwen3 Coder NextToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights 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-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/mercury-2/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill