ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.8 Flash Next vs Mercury Edit 2

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

  1. 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

  2. Inception

    Mercury Edit 2

    Released Mar 30, 2026

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

  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 NextQwen3.8 Flash Next: Text, Images, Video · Mercury Edit 2: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3.8 Flash NextPublishes downloadable weights (qwen-community-1.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.8 Flash NextMercury Edit 2
Price50%7670
Inputs & features30%800
Context window20%370
Overall100%70/10035/100

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.

Qwen3.8 Flash Next vs Mercury Edit 2 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.8 Flash NextAlibaba (Qwen)Mercury Edit 2Inception
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.20 (best)$0.25
Output$0.50 (best)$0.75
Cached input—$0.025
Blended (3:1)$0.275 (best)$0.375
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersOfficial Inception API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)32,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesNo
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenqwen-community-1.0Proprietary
API model ID—mercury-edit-2
API providers5 (best)1
ReleasedAug 27, 2026Mar 30, 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.

  • Qwen3.8 Flash Next$3.00
  • Mercury Edit 2$4.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

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, Qwen3.8 Flash Next or Mercury Edit 2?

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. Qwen3.8 Flash Next has not been scored yet and Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 Flash Next and Mercury Edit 2 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: Qwen3.8 Flash Next up to 131,072, Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.8 Flash Next accepts text, images and video; Mercury Edit 2 accepts text. 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