Advertisement
Compare/Magistral Medium 1.2 vs Mercury 2

Magistral Medium 1.2vsMercury 2

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

Mistral

Magistral Medium 1.2

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 (1-1)
Tie

Pricing Comparison

MetricMagistral Medium 1.2Mercury 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
Magistral Medium 1.2
—
Mercury 2
881 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Magistral Medium 1.2
—
Mercury 2
4.60s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Magistral Medium 1.2 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. Magistral Medium 1.2 is strongest on Coding Index (21.3), Intelligence Index (11.8). 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. Mistral and Inception sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Mistral 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.

Head-to-head deltas

  • Benchmark wins tie exactly at 1–1. The tiebreaker on raw benchmark parity will be price, speed, or capability coverage.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
11.811.5
Coding Index
21.331.1
Math Index
——
GPQA Diamond
——
MMLU-Pro
——
LiveCodeBench
——
AIME 2025
——
MATH-500
——
Humanity's Last Exam
——
SciCode
——
IFBench
——
TerminalBench
——
Magistral Medium 1.21 wins
1 winsMercury 2

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Magistral Medium 1.2 or Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.38/M tokens vs $—/M for Magistral Medium 1.2.

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

When should I use Magistral Medium 1.2 vs Mercury 2?

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