Mercury Edit 2 vs MiMo-V2.5 vs Step 3.5 Flash 2603
MiMo-V2.5 comes out ahead, 79 to 62 and 35 on our weighted score, though Step 3.5 Flash 2603 is 14% cheaper per token.
InceptionMercury Edit 2
35/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context32K
- Our pick
XiaomiMiMo-V2.5
79/100- ECI—
- Price$0.14 / $0.28
- Context1.05M
StepFunStep 3.5 Flash 2603
62/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.30
- Context256K
MiMo-V2.5 is our pick
MiMo-V2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62) and Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 wins 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 priceStep 3.5 Flash 2603Step 3.5 Flash 2603 $0.15 · MiMo-V2.5 $0.175 · Mercury Edit 2 $0.375 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMiMo-V2.5MiMo-V2.5 1,048,576 · Step 3.5 Flash 2603 256,000 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMiMo-V2.5Mercury Edit 2: Text · MiMo-V2.5: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Step 3.5 Flash 2603: Text
- Self-hostingMiMo-V2.5 and Step 3.5 Flash 2603Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Mercury Edit 2 | MiMo-V2.5 | Step 3.5 Flash 2603 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 70 | 86 | 89 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 0 | 80 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 61 | 36 |
| Overall | 100% | 35/100 | 79/100 | 62/100 |
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 Edit 2Inception | MiMo-V2.5Xiaomi | Step 3.5 Flash 2603StepFun |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 | $0.14 | $0.10 (best) |
| Output | $0.75 | $0.28 (best) | $0.30 |
| Cached input | $0.025 | $0.0028 (best) | $0.02 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.375 | $0.175 | $0.15 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Inception API | Official Xiaomi API | Official StepFun (Global) API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 32,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 256,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 256,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yeslow · high |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Open |
| API model ID | mercury-edit-2 | mimo-v2.5 | step-3.5-flash-2603 |
| API providers | 1 | 21 (best) | 3 |
| Released | Mar 30, 2026 | Apr 22, 2026 | Apr 2, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Dec 2024 | Jan 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 Edit 2$4.00
- MiMo-V2.5$1.96
- Step 3.5 Flash 2603$1.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Mercury Edit 2, MiMo-V2.5 or Step 3.5 Flash 2603?
MiMo-V2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62) and Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 wins 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 Edit 2, MiMo-V2.5 or Step 3.5 Flash 2603?
Step 3.5 Flash 2603 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price); Mercury Edit 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 $0.15 per million tokens for Step 3.5 Flash 2603 versus $0.175 for MiMo-V2.5 (1.2× as much) and $0.375 for Mercury Edit 2 (2.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet, MiMo-V2.5 has not been scored yet and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury Edit 2, MiMo-V2.5 and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Mercury Edit 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
MiMo-V2.5 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 256,000 for Step 3.5 Flash 2603 and 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2. Maximum output per response: Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192, MiMo-V2.5 up to 131,072, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 up to 256,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Mercury Edit 2 accepts text; MiMo-V2.5 accepts text, images, audio and video; Step 3.5 Flash 2603 accepts text. MiMo-V2.5 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
MiMo-V2.5 and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiMo-V2.5 is the newest, released Apr 22, 2026. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 came out Apr 2, 2026; Mercury Edit 2 came out Mar 30, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: MiMo-V2.5 Dec 2024, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 Jan 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.
