ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Mercury Edit 2 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next

Qwen3.8 Flash Next comes out ahead, 70 to 35 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Inception

    Mercury Edit 2

    Released Mar 30, 2026

    35/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.75
    • Context32K
    Full specs Remove Mercury Edit 2
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 Flash Next

    Released Aug 27, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.20 / $0.50
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 Flash Next

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is our pick

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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 priceQwen3.8 Flash NextQwen3.8 Flash Next $0.275 · Mercury Edit 2 $0.375 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.8 Flash NextQwen3.8 Flash Next 262,144 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.8 Flash NextMercury Edit 2: Text · Qwen3.8 Flash Next: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3.8 Flash NextPublishes downloadable weights (qwen-community-1.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMercury Edit 2Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Price50%7076
Inputs & features30%080
Context window20%037
Overall100%35/10070/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Mercury Edit 2 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next specifications side by side
SpecificationMercury Edit 2InceptionQwen3.8 Flash NextAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.25$0.20 (best)
Output$0.75$0.50 (best)
Cached input$0.025—
Blended (3:1)$0.375$0.275 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Inception APIMedian of 5 providers
Limits
Context window32,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingNoYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpenqwen-community-1.0
API model IDmercury-edit-2—
API providers15 (best)
ReleasedMar 30, 2026Aug 27, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

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
  • Qwen3.8 Flash Next$3.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Mercury Edit 2 or Qwen3.8 Flash Next?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Mercury Edit 2 (35). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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 or Qwen3.8 Flash Next?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is cheaper at $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). 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 $0.275 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 Flash Next versus $0.375 for Mercury Edit 2 (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet and Qwen3.8 Flash Next has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Mercury Edit 2 and Qwen3.8 Flash Next 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?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2. Maximum output per response: Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192, Qwen3.8 Flash Next up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Mercury Edit 2 accepts text; Qwen3.8 Flash Next accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.8 Flash Next handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next publishes its weights (qwen-community-1.0) and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next is the newest, released Aug 27, 2026. Mercury Edit 2 came out Mar 30, 2026.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons