API cost decision in 10 seconds

NewMercury 2.5 Preview vs Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Pick Mercury 2.5 Preview for lower cost; pick Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) only if the larger context window matters more.

Page updated:  Data confirmed:  Prices normalized to USD per 1M tokens Sample workload: 1M input + 500K output

Budget verdict

Pick Mercury 2.5 Preview for lower cost; pick Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) only if the larger context window matters more.

On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 Preview is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.78 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch), saving $0.66 (85.2% lower).

Cost-first pickMercury 2.5 Preview
Context-first pickGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Sample savings$0.6685.2%
10x traffic gap$6.6

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) has more context, but Mercury 2.5 Preview saves $0.66 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $6.6. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.

Cost sensitivity

Workload Sensitivity

Same prices, different token mixes.

Mercury 2.5 Preview stays cheaper across input-heavy, balanced, and output-heavy sample workloads.

Workload shapeToken mixBetter pickMercury 2.5 PreviewGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
Input-heavy / RAG5M input + 500K outputMercury 2.5 Preview$0.28$1.38
Balanced workload1M input + 1M outputMercury 2.5 Preview$0.19$1.4
Output-heavy chatbot1M input + 5M outputMercury 2.5 Preview$0.79$6.4
Cheaper input Mercury 2.5 Preview $0.04 vs $0.15 / 1M

Mercury 2.5 Preview is $0.11 cheaper per 1M input tokens (73.3% lower; 3.75x difference).

Cheaper output Mercury 2.5 Preview $0.15 vs $1.25 / 1M

Mercury 2.5 Preview is $1.1 cheaper per 1M output tokens (88% lower; 8.33x difference).

Larger context Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) 260K vs 1.05M

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) has 788.58K more context (4.03x larger).

Sample workload Mercury 2.5 Preview $0.11 vs $0.78

Mercury 2.5 Preview is $0.66 cheaper on the standard workload (85.2% lower).

Estimate your workload cost

Your Workload Cost

Prices are normalized to USD per 1M tokens.
Mercury 2.5 Preview Calculating… Estimated API cost
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) Calculating… Estimated API cost
Cheaper for this workload Calculating… Difference: calculating…

This estimate uses normalized public API pricing per 1M tokens. It is a planning aid, not a billing quote. Verify provider pricing, limits, and terms before production use.

Quick Decision

Verdict

Mercury 2.5 Preview has the lower input price; Mercury 2.5 Preview has the lower output price; Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Mercury 2.5 Preview is cheaper for the standard workload.

For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.11 for Mercury 2.5 Preview and $0.78 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch).

Best Fit

Choose Mercury 2.5 Preview when you care most about lower input-token price, and lower output-token price.

Choose Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when you care most about larger context window.

Decision Notes
  • On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 Preview is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.78 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch), saving $0.66 (85.2% lower).
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview is $0.66 cheaper on the standard workload (85.2% lower).
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview is $0.11 cheaper per 1M input tokens (73.3% lower; 3.75x difference).
  • Mercury 2.5 Preview is $1.1 cheaper per 1M output tokens (88% lower; 8.33x difference).
  • Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) has 788.58K more context (4.03x larger).
Head-to-Head Specs
FeatureNewMercury 2.5 Preview
(Inception)
Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)
(Google)
Input Price
prompt tokens per 1M
$0.04$0.15
Completion Price
per 1M tokens
$0.15$1.25
Sample Workload Cost
1M input + 500K output
$0.11$0.78
Context Window260K1.05M
Release Date

Use-Case Decision Matrix

Use caseBetter pickWhy
Budget-constrained productionMercury 2.5 PreviewOn the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 Preview is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.78 for Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch), saving $0.66 (85.2% lower).
High-volume input processingMercury 2.5 PreviewLower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill.
Long responses and chatbotsMercury 2.5 PreviewLower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens.
RAG or long-document workGemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files.

Related Alternatives

Same-provider lower-cost swaps
  • Gemma 4 26B A4B (free) can replace Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
  • Gemma 4 31B (free) can replace Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
  • Lyria 3 Pro Preview can replace Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
  • Lyria 3 Clip Preview can replace Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch) when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.

Cheaper alternatives

Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.

Open cheapest models

Larger context alternatives

Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.

Open largest context models

Provider catalogs

Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.

Open provider hubs

Inception catalog

Review all tracked Inception models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.

Open Inception models

Google catalog

Check other Google models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.

Open Google models
Mercury 2.5 Preview

Mercury 2.5 is the fastest reasoning LLM, and the latest diffusion LLM (dLLM) from Inception. Instead of generating tokens sequentially, Mercury 2.5 produces and refines multiple tokens in parallel, achieving...

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite (batch)

Gemini 3.5 Flash Lite is a high-efficiency model from Google with upgraded agentic capabilities. It is suited for subagents that execute focused tasks within complex, multi-agent workflows.