Commenters question Mercury 2.5's competitive position against cheaper alternatives
2 Sep 23 7:03 PM · 2d ago · 2 comments · 1 source · development 2 of 5
Multiple commenters compared Mercury 2.5 unfavorably to existing open-weight models like DeepSeek v4 Flash and Qwen, noting that similar-capability models are available at lower cost through established inference providers.
“Pricing at $0.25 and $0.75 already puts its cost well above reasonably reputable inference providers for deepseek v4 flash or qwen 3.8-flash-next…so I don't see the point.”
walrus01Mercury 2.5 Language modelArtificial Analysis Benchmarking organization
The whole story articlespostscomments the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
What people said 2 voices · verbatim
-
Pricing at $0.25 and $0.75 already puts its cost well above reasonably reputable inference providers for deepseek v4 flash or qwen 3.8-flash-next or similar class of open weight LLMs that fit in under 170GB of RAM, so I don't see the point. I think this is probably also stupider than laguna s 2.1 which can also be very cheap to serve.
-
If you care about speed Cerebras gpt-oss-120b is 1400tk/s and "just as smart" in ranking.I've used it on a few for fun projects and its decent but the speed is crazy to watch.
All 5 developments of Mercury 2.5 LLM debuts at 770 tokens per second with… →
Hacker NewsNewswiresMastodon