Compare/Ling 3.0 Tiny vs Mercury 2

Ling 3.0 TinyvsMercury 2

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

InclusionAI

Ling 3.0 Tiny

Input
$0/M
Output
$0/M
Speed
175 tok/s
TTFT
2.57s
Inception

Mercury 2

Input
$0.25/M
Output
$0.75/M
Speed
835 tok/s
TTFT
3.93s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Ling 3.0 Tiny
Faster (tok/s)
Mercury 2
Lower Latency
Ling 3.0 Tiny
Benchmarks (1-1)
Tie

Pricing Comparison

MetricLing 3.0 TinyMercury 2
Input ($/M tokens)$0$0.25
Output ($/M tokens)$0$0.75
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Ling 3.0 Tiny$0.00
Mercury 2$0.33

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Ling 3.0 Tiny
175 tok/s
Mercury 2
835 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Ling 3.0 Tiny
2.57s
Mercury 2
3.93s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Ling 3.0 Tiny and Mercury 2 split the benchmark comparison evenly at 1–1. The tiebreaker here is price, speed, and what you actually run them on.

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. Ling 3.0 Tiny is strongest on Coding Index (26.5), Intelligence Index (24.5). Mercury 2 leads on Coding Index (31.1), Intelligence Index (21.9).

Speed. On throughput, Mercury 2 generates tokens at 835 tok/s versus 175 tok/s — about 79% faster. On time-to-first-token, Ling 3.0 Tiny responds in 2570ms vs 3930ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.

Provider. InclusionAI and Inception sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: InclusionAI 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.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Ling 3.0 Tiny costs $0.00 ($0/year); Mercury 2 costs $18.75 ($225/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Ling 3.0 Tiny ≈ $0.00/run, Mercury 2 ≈ $2.75/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Ling 3.0 Tiny ≈ $0/run, Mercury 2 ≈ $125/run. Ling 3.0 Tiny becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

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.

Head-to-head deltas

  • Benchmark wins tie exactly at 1–1. The tiebreaker on raw benchmark parity will be price, speed, or capability coverage.
  • On throughput, Mercury 2 is 4.76× faster (835 tok/s vs 175 tok/s). For streaming chat or real-time agents this alone often flips the recommendation.
  • Aggregate benchmark score (sum across 12 categories, capped at 100): Ling 3.0 Tiny = 51, Mercury 2 = 53. Within 15% — effectively equivalent if both meet the threshold your product requires.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
24.521.9
Coding Index
26.531.1
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Ling 3.0 Tiny1 wins
1 winsMercury 2

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Ling 3.0 Tiny or Mercury 2?

Ling 3.0 Tiny is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.00/M tokens vs $0.38/M for Mercury 2.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

It's a tie — both models win 1 benchmarks each across 12 evaluated categories. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Mercury 2 generates tokens faster at 835 tok/s vs 175 tok/s. Ling 3.0 Tiny also has lower time-to-first-token (2.57s vs 3.93s).

When should I use Ling 3.0 Tiny vs Mercury 2?

Choose based on your priorities: Ling 3.0 Tiny for lower cost, both perform similarly on benchmarks, and Mercury 2 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.