Navigate
Advertise here

Mercury 2.5 (medium) vs Qwen3.6 27B

The average score is effectively tied at 6.4 vs 6.3. Mercury 2.5 (medium) has the lower benchmark cost at $0.034 vs $0.147. Mercury 2.5 (medium) is faster at 7.74s vs 12.71s, with pass rates of 63.8% vs 47.8%.

Last updated at: 2026-10-01

Compared models

Rank
#206
Total Output Tokens
138,946
Response Time (avg)
7.74s
Total Cost
$0.034
Rank
#213
Total Output Tokens
20,816
Response Time (avg)
12.71s
Total Cost
$0.147
Recommended model Mercury 2.5 (medium)

It has the best score here (6.4), while costing about 4.4x less than Qwen3.6 27B.

Detailed comparison

Metric Mercury 2.5 Mercury 2.5 medium Release: 2026-09-08 Qwen3.6 27B Qwen3.6 27B none Release: 2026-04-20
Score 6.4 6.3
Rank #206 #213
Reliability 9.7 10.0
Consistency 8.3 7.7
Attempts 69/69 69/69
Tests Correct
Attempt pass rate 63.8% 47.8%
Flaky tests 5 6
Total Runs 69 69
Cost per result 0.280 1.874
Total Cost $0.034 $0.147
Input Price $0.040 / 1M $0.320 / 1M
Output Price $0.150 / 1M $3.200 / 1M
Total Input Tokens 317,982 250,919
Output Tokens 3,918 20,816
Reasoning Tokens 135,028 0
Response Time (avg) 7.74s 12.71s
Response Time (max) 107.89s 156.31s
Response Time (total) 178.07s 292.29s
Parameters ~100B 27B
Availability Closed Open source

Model generation showcase

Hamster playing table tennis

Prompt: Create a detailed SVG illustration of a hamster playing table tennis.

#206 Mercury 2.5

medium
Cost
$0.001
Time
3.8s
Tokens
3,386 tok

#213 Qwen3.6 27B

none
Cost
$0.009
Time
83.0s
Tokens
4,549 tok

Top Models by Score

Score vs Total Cost

Response Time (avg)

Score vs Response Time (avg)

Total Output Tokens

Score vs Total Output Tokens

Category Breakdown

Coding Score Consistency Attempt pass rate Flaky tests Tests Correct Response Time (avg) Input Tokens Output Tokens Reasoning Tokens
Mercury 2.5 5.0 5.1 44.5% 2 3.70s 7,807 488 21,857
Qwen3.6 27B 5.5 10.0 33.3% 0 4.16s 7,913 539 0

Quick Compare

Switch Comparison Pair