Qwen3.5 9B Base vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Mercury 2
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning comes out ahead, 67 to 52 and 50 on our weighted score, though Mercury 2 is 6% cheaper per token.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 9B Base
50/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.807
- Context262K
- Our pick
NVIDIANemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
67/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.85
- Context256K
InceptionMercury 2
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context128K
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is our pick
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Mercury 2 (52) and Qwen3.5 9B Base (50). 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 priceMercury 2Mercury 2 $0.375 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning $0.40 · Qwen3.5 9B Base $0.427 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 9B BaseQwen3.5 9B Base 262,144 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 256,000 · Mercury 2 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningQwen3.5 9B Base: Text, Images, Video · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Mercury 2: Text
- Self-hostingQwen3.5 9B Base and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.5 9B Base | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 65 | 66 | 67 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 90 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 36 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 50/100 | 67/100 | 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) | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIA | Mercury 2Inception |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.30 | $0.25 (best) | $0.25 (best) |
| Output | $0.807 | $0.85 | $0.75 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.025 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.427 | $0.40 | $0.375 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 4 providers | Official Inception API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 256,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens (best) | 50,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | nvidia/nemotron-3-nano-omni-30b-a3b-reasoning | mercury-2 |
| API providers | 1 | 9 (best) | 7 |
| Released | Feb 26, 2026 | Apr 28, 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
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning$4.20
- Mercury 2$4.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.5 9B Base, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Mercury 2?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Mercury 2 (52) and Qwen3.5 9B Base (50). 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, Qwen3.5 9B Base, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Mercury 2?
Mercury 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning costs $0.25 input / $0.85 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Nvidia); 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 2 versus $0.40 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning (1.1× 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, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 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, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 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 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 256,000 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning and 128,000 for Mercury 2. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.5 9B Base up to 65,536, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning up to 65,536, Mercury 2 up to 50,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.5 9B Base accepts text, images and video; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning accepts text, images, audio and video; Mercury 2 accepts text. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.5 9B Base and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Mercury 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the newest, released Apr 28, 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.
Related comparisons
- Qwen3.5 9B Base vs Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
- Qwen3.5 9B Base vs GLM-4.6VZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Trinity Large ThinkingArcee AI
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Mercury Edit 2Inception
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 FlashStepFun
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs CoBuddyBaidu
