Mercury 2 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B comes out ahead, 71 to 54 and 53 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
InceptionMercury 2
53/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context128K
- Our pick
NVIDIANemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
71/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.20
- Context262K
- NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.80
- Context262K
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is our pick
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (54) and Mercury 2 (53). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B $0.087 · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B $0.35 · Mercury 2 $0.375 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12BNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B 262,144 · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B 262,144 · Mercury 2 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMercury 2: Text · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B: Text · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B: Text
- Self-hostingNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Mercury 2 | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B | Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 70 | 100 | 72 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 45 | 45 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 37 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 53/100 | 71/100 | 54/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Mercury 2Inception | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNVIDIA | Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 | $0.05 (best) | $0.20 |
| Output | $0.75 | $0.20 (best) | $0.80 |
| Cached input | $0.025 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.375 | $0.087 (best) | $0.35 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Inception API | Median of 9 providers | Official Nvidia API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 50,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Open |
| API model ID | mercury-2 | nvidia/nemotron-3.5-lightning-30b-a3b | nvidia/nemotron-3-super-120b-a12b |
| API providers | 1 | 12 | 19 (best) |
| Released | Feb 24, 2026 | Aug 11, 2026 | Mar 11, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 1, 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Mercury 2$4.00
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B$0.90
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B$3.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Mercury 2, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B or Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 71/100 against Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (54) and Mercury 2 (53). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B or Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers; free on Nvidia). Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B costs $0.20 input / $0.80 output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price); Mercury 2 costs $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.087 per million tokens for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B versus $0.35 for Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (4× as much) and $0.375 for Mercury 2 (4.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mercury 2 has not been scored yet, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B has not been scored yet and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury 2, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 128,000 for Mercury 2. Maximum output per response: Mercury 2 up to 50,000, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B up to 262,144, Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Mercury 2 accepts text; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B accepts text; Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mercury 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is the newest, released Aug 11, 2026. Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B came out Mar 11, 2026; Mercury 2 came out Feb 24, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Mercury 2 Jan 1, 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
