Qwen3.5 9B Base vs Mercury Edit 2 vs Mercury 2
Too close to call on our weighted score (Mercury 2 52, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50, Mercury Edit 2 34). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 9B Base
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.807
- Context262K
InceptionMercury Edit 2
34/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context32K
- Inception
Mercury 2
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context128K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Mercury 2 52/100, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50/100, Mercury Edit 2 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury Edit 2 on price and Qwen3.5 9B Base for long inputs. 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 Edit 2 and Mercury 2Mercury Edit 2 $0.375 · Mercury 2 $0.375 · Qwen3.5 9B Base $0.427 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 9B BaseQwen3.5 9B Base 262,144 · Mercury 2 128,000 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 9B BaseQwen3.5 9B Base: Text, Images, Video · Mercury Edit 2: Text · Mercury 2: Text
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 9B BasePublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.5 9B Base | Mercury Edit 2 | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 65 | 67 | 67 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 0 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 34/100 | 52/100 |
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 | Qwen3.5 9B BaseAlibaba (Qwen) | Mercury Edit 2Inception | Mercury 2Inception |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.25 (best) | $0.25 (best) |
| Output | $0.807 | $0.75 (best) | $0.75 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.025 | $0.025 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.427 | $0.375 (best) | $0.375 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Inception API | Official Inception API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 50,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | No | No | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | mercury-edit-2 | mercury-2 |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 7 (best) |
| Released | Feb 26, 2026 | Mar 30, 2026 | Feb 24, 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.
- Qwen3.5 9B Base$4.61
- Mercury Edit 2$4.00
- Mercury 2$4.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.5 9B Base, Mercury Edit 2 or Mercury 2?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Mercury 2 52/100, Qwen3.5 9B Base 50/100, Mercury Edit 2 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Mercury Edit 2 on price and Qwen3.5 9B Base for long inputs. 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 9B Base, Mercury Edit 2 or Mercury 2?
Mercury Edit 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). Mercury 2 costs $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price); Qwen3.5 9B Base costs $0.30 input / $0.807 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 Edit 2 versus $0.375 for Mercury 2 (1× as much) and $0.427 for Qwen3.5 9B Base (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen3.5 9B Base has not been scored yet, Mercury Edit 2 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 9B Base, Mercury Edit 2 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 9B Base and Mercury Edit 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 9B Base has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Mercury 2 and 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 9B Base up to 65,536, Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192, Mercury 2 up to 50,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.5 9B Base accepts text, images and video; Mercury Edit 2 accepts text; Mercury 2 accepts text. Qwen3.5 9B Base handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 9B Base publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 and Mercury 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Mercury Edit 2 is the newest, released Mar 30, 2026. Qwen3.5 9B Base came out Feb 26, 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.
