Compare / head-to-head

Claude Opus 4.8vsMercury 2.5

Claude Opus 4.8 leads 1 of 1 shared benchmark. Mercury 2.5 is 31.6x cheaper per token. Claude Opus 4.8 has the larger context window (1M tokens).

Benchmarks from cited public sources; pricing from official pages; status from official provider feeds.

Shared benchmarks
1 – 0
Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Cheaper per token
Mercury 2.5
31.6x cheaper, input + output
Larger context
Claude Opus 4.8
1M tokens
Providers
2 providers
Anthropic · Inception
Claude Opus 4.8
Anthropic · released 2026-05-28
textvision
Context
1M
Max out
128K
Input /1M
$5 ↗
Output /1M
$25 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.5
Scores
47 · 16 core
Mercury 2.5
Inception · released 2026-09-08
text
Context
260K
Max out
66K
Input /1M
$0.2 ↗
Output /1M
$0.75 ↗
Cached /1M
$0.02
Scores
1 · 0 core
Quality

Benchmark matrix

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury 2.5ΔEdge
Reported by both · 1
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals AI)23.2% ↗0% ↗+23.2 ptClaude Opus 4.8
Only Claude Opus 4.8 reports · 39
SWE-bench Verified88.6% ↗not reported——
GPQA Diamond93.6% ↗not reported——
AIME 2026100% ↗matharena ⚠not reported——
Humanity's Last Exam (no tools)49.8% ↗not reported——
LMArena Elo1452.7 ↗not reported——
APEX-Agents (Mercor)48.9% ↗not reported——
BrowseComp84.3% ↗not reported——
Chess Puzzles (Epoch AI run)34% ↗epoch runnot reported——
DeepSWE v1.1 (Datacurve)59% ↗not reported——
EBR-bench (Epoch AI run)28.6% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierMath Tier 4 v2 (Epoch AI run)56.1% ↗epoch runnot reported——
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 v2 (Epoch AI run)80% ↗epoch runnot reported——
Furniture Assembly (Epoch AI run)42.5% ↗epoch runnot reported——
GSO Opt@1 (GSO)47.1% ↗not reported——
Humanity's Last Exam (with tools)57.9% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Agentic Coding (LiveBench)50.5% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Coding (LiveBench)81.8% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Data Analysis (LiveBench)66% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Instruction Following (LiveBench)72% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Language (LiveBench)79.7% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Mathematics (LiveBench)94.3% ↗not reported——
LiveBench Reasoning (LiveBench)89.2% ↗not reported——
LMArena Agent (LMArena)0.0664 ↗not reported——
LMArena Vision (LMArena)1286.4 ↗not reported——
LMArena WebDev (LMArena)1555.5 ↗not reported——
Mystery Game Puzzles (Epoch AI run)36% ↗epoch runnot reported——
OSWorld-Verified83.4% ↗not reported——
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 (Epoch AI run)98.3% ↗epoch runnot reported——
SAGE (Vals AI)54.8% ↗not reported——
SimpleBench (SimpleBench)64.8% ↗not reported——
SimpleQA Verified53% ↗epoch runnot reported——
SWE-bench Multilingual84.4% ↗not reported——
SWE-bench Multimodal38.4% ↗not reported——
SWE-Bench Pro69.2% ↗not reported——
tau2-bench Banking Knowledge (Sierra)39.7% ↗not reported——
Terminal-Bench 2.174.6% ↗not reported——
Toolathlon-Verified (HKUST)76.2% ↗not reported——
Vending-Bench 2 (Andon Labs)5787.43 ↗not reported——
WeirdML (Håvard Tveit Ihle)82.9% ↗not reported——
Only Mercury 2.5 reports · 0
Mercury 2.5 reports nothing Claude Opus 4.8 does not.
Scores tagged "epoch" or "matharena" are independent runs, used only where the lab has not published its own; ⚠ marks rows MathArena flags as released after the competition. Higher is better on every row. Δ is Claude Opus 4.8 minus Mercury 2.5 in the benchmark's own unit. "Not reported" means the lab has not published that figure; it is not a zero. ↗ opens the source.
Specs & pricing

Side by side

SpecClaude Opus 4.8Mercury 2.5Edge
Context window1M tokens260K tokensClaude Opus 4.8
Max output128K tokens66K tokensClaude Opus 4.8
Input price / 1M$5 ↗$0.2 ↗Mercury 2.5
Output price / 1M$25 ↗$0.75 ↗Mercury 2.5
Cached input / 1M$0.5 ↗$0.02 ↗Mercury 2.5
Input + output / 1M
Lower is cheaper. List prices; batch, tool and regional fees excluded.
$30$0.95Mercury 2.5
Modalitiestext · visiontextClaude Opus 4.8
Released2026-05-282026-09-08—
Cited benchmark scores471—
Reliability

Provider status

All providers →
More matchups

Claude Opus 4.8 vs …

More matchups

Mercury 2.5 vs …

Built by Respan
Which one wins on your data?

Public benchmarks are a starting point. Run Claude Opus 4.8 and Mercury 2.5 on your own prompts with Respan evals, or route to either through one gateway key with automatic failover.