Advertisement
Compare/GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest) vs Mercury 2

GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)vsMercury 2

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

OpenAI

GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)

Input
—
Output
—
Speed
—
TTFT
—
Inception

Mercury 2

Input
$0.25/M
Output
$0.75/M
Speed
881 tok/s
TTFT
4.60s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Mercury 2
Faster (tok/s)
Mercury 2
Lower Latency
Mercury 2
Benchmarks (0-2)
Mercury 2

Pricing Comparison

MetricGPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)Mercury 2
Input ($/M tokens)—$0.25
Output ($/M tokens)—$0.75
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Mercury 2$0.33

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)
—
Mercury 2
881 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)
—
Mercury 2
4.60s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Mercury 2 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

Pricing. Pricing varies significantly between these models — check the table above for the exact per-token rates. Many production workloads actually surface input-token cost (retrieval-augmented prompts, code-context windows), so factor both directions.

Strengths. GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest) is strongest on Intelligence Index (9.0). Mercury 2 leads on Coding Index (31.1), Intelligence Index (11.5).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. OpenAI and Inception sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: OpenAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Inception often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
9.011.5
Coding Index
—31.1
Math Index
——
GPQA Diamond
——
MMLU-Pro
——
LiveCodeBench
——
AIME 2025
——
MATH-500
——
Humanity's Last Exam
——
SciCode
——
IFBench
——
TerminalBench
——
GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest)0 wins
2 winsMercury 2

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest) or Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.38/M tokens vs $—/M for GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest).

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Mercury 2 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest). See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Mercury 2 generates tokens faster at 881 tok/s vs — tok/s. However, Mercury 2 has lower time-to-first-token (4.60s vs —s).

When should I use GPT-4o (March 2025, chatgpt-4o-latest) vs Mercury 2?

Choose based on your priorities: Mercury 2 for lower cost, Mercury 2 for stronger benchmark performance, and Mercury 2 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.