Trinity Large Preview vs Mercury Edit 2 vs DeepSeek OCR 2
Trinity Large Preview comes out ahead, 34 to 15 and 0 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
Arcee AITrinity Large Preview
34/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context524K
InceptionMercury Edit 2
0/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.75
- Context32K
DeepSeekDeepSeek OCR 2
15/100- ECI—
- Price$0.89 / $1.47
- Context8K
Trinity Large Preview is our pick
Trinity Large Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 34/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (15) and Mercury Edit 2 (0). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 2Mercury Edit 2 $0.375 · DeepSeek OCR 2 $1.03 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Trinity Large Preview unpriced
- Longest contextTrinity Large PreviewTrinity Large Preview 524,288 · Mercury Edit 2 32,000 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsDeepSeek OCR 2Trinity Large Preview: Text · Mercury Edit 2: Text · DeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images
- Self-hostingTrinity Large Preview and DeepSeek OCR 2Publishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
| Measure | Weight | Trinity Large Preview | Mercury Edit 2 | DeepSeek OCR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 25 | 0 | 25 |
| Context window | 40% | 49 | 0 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 34/100 | 0/100 | 15/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Trinity Large PreviewArcee AI | Mercury Edit 2Inception | DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | — | $0.25 (best) | $0.89 |
| Output | — | $0.75 (best) | $1.47 |
| Cached input | — | $0.025 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.375 (best) | $1.03 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Official Inception API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 524,288 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Max output | 262,144 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | mercury-edit-2 | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 2 (best) |
| Released | Jan 27, 2026 | Mar 30, 2026 | Jan 27, 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.
- Trinity Large Preview—
- Mercury Edit 2$4.00
- DeepSeek OCR 2$11.83
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Trinity Large Preview, Mercury Edit 2 or DeepSeek OCR 2?
Trinity Large Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 34/100 against DeepSeek OCR 2 (15) and Mercury Edit 2 (0). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Trinity Large Preview, Mercury Edit 2 or DeepSeek OCR 2?
Mercury Edit 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (official Inception API price). DeepSeek OCR 2 costs $0.89 input / $1.47 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 $1.03 for DeepSeek OCR 2 (2.8× as much). Trinity Large Preview has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Trinity Large Preview has not been scored yet, Mercury Edit 2 has not been scored yet and DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Trinity Large Preview, Mercury Edit 2 and DeepSeek OCR 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 and DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Trinity Large Preview has the largest context window at 524,288 tokens, against 32,000 for Mercury Edit 2 and 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: Trinity Large Preview up to 262,144, Mercury Edit 2 up to 8,192, DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Trinity Large Preview accepts text; Mercury Edit 2 accepts text; DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images. DeepSeek OCR 2 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Trinity Large Preview and DeepSeek OCR 2 publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Mercury Edit 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Mercury Edit 2 is the newest, released Mar 30, 2026. Trinity Large Preview came out Jan 27, 2026; DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 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.
