ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base vs Mercury 2

Mercury 2 comes out ahead, 52 to 45 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base

    Released Feb 24, 2026

    45/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.54 / $1.33
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base
  2. Our pick

    Inception

    Mercury 2

    Released Feb 24, 2026

    52/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.75
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Mercury 2

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Mercury 2 is our pick

Mercury 2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 52/100 against Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base (45). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base wins on 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 priceMercury 2Mercury 2 $0.375 · Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base $0.739 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 35B-A3B BaseQwen3.5 35B-A3B Base 262,144 · Mercury 2 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 35B-A3B BaseQwen3.5 35B-A3B Base: Text, Images, Video · Mercury 2: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3.5 35B-A3B BasePublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.5 35B-A3B BaseMercury 2
Price50%5467
Inputs & features30%3545
Context window20%3724
Overall100%45/10052/100

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.

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base vs Mercury 2 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.5 35B-A3B BaseAlibaba (Qwen)Mercury 2Inception
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.54$0.25 (best)
Output$1.33$0.75 (best)
Cached input—$0.025
Blended (3:1)$0.739$0.375 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Inception API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output65,536 tokens (best)50,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningNoYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingNoYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0Proprietary
API model ID—mercury-2
API providers17 (best)
ReleasedFeb 24, 2026Feb 24, 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.

  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base$8.07
  • Mercury 2$4.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base or Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is the better all-round choice, scoring 52/100 against Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base (45). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base wins on 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, Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base or Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base costs $0.54 input / $1.33 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.375 per million tokens for Mercury 2 versus $0.739 for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base (2× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base has not been scored yet and Mercury 2 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base and Mercury 2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Mercury 2. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base up to 65,536, Mercury 2 up to 50,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base accepts text, images and video; Mercury 2 accepts text. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Mercury 2 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Base is the newest, released Feb 24, 2026. Mercury 2 came out Feb 24, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons