Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B vs Mercury 2.5 vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash comes out ahead, 70 to 59 and 55 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
NVIDIANemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.50
- Context1.05M
InceptionMercury 2.5
55/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.75
- Context260K
- Our pick
MiniMaxMiniMax-M3.1-Flash
70/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.60
- Context1M
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is our pick
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B (59) and Mercury 2.5 (55). It leads on inputs & features. 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 priceMiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax-M3.1-Flash $0.263 · Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B $0.275 · Mercury 2.5 $0.338 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextNemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BNemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B 1,048,576 · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 1,000,000 · Mercury 2.5 260,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMiniMax-M3.1-FlashNemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B: Text · Mercury 2.5: Text · MiniMax-M3.1-Flash: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingNemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B | Mercury 2.5 | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 73 | 69 | 74 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 45 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 61 | 36 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 59/100 | 55/100 | 70/100 |
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 | Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BNVIDIA | Mercury 2.5Inception | MiniMax-M3.1-FlashMiniMax |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.20 | $0.20 | $0.15 (best) |
| Output | $0.50 (best) | $0.75 | $0.60 |
| Cached input | — | $0.02 | $0.015 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.275 | $0.338 | $0.263 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Inception API | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 260,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 512,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yeslow · medium · high | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | mercury-2.5 | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash |
| API providers | 1 | 6 | 25 (best) |
| Released | Oct 15, 2026 | Sep 8, 2026 | Oct 19, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B$3.00
- Mercury 2.5$3.50
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash$2.70
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B, Mercury 2.5 or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B (59) and Mercury 2.5 (55). It leads on inputs & features. 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, Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B, Mercury 2.5 or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash?
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B costs $0.20 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Mercury 2.5 costs $0.20 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 $0.263 per million tokens for MiniMax-M3.1-Flash versus $0.275 for Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B (1× as much) and $0.338 for Mercury 2.5 (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B has not been scored yet, Mercury 2.5 has not been scored yet and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B, Mercury 2.5 and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash 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 Super 120B A12B has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for MiniMax-M3.1-Flash and 260,000 for Mercury 2.5. Maximum output per response: Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B up to 131,072, Mercury 2.5 up to 65,536, MiniMax-M3.1-Flash up to 512,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B accepts text; Mercury 2.5 accepts text; MiniMax-M3.1-Flash accepts text, images and video. MiniMax-M3.1-Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Mercury 2.5 and MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is the newest, released Oct 19, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12B came out Oct 15, 2026; Mercury 2.5 came out Sep 8, 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 Nov 2, 2026.
