Mercury 2.5 is $0.03 cheaper per 1M input tokens (46.7% lower; 1.88x difference).
API cost decision in 10 seconds
NewLing 3.1 Flash vs Mercury 2.5
Pick Mercury 2.5 for lower cost; pick Ling 3.1 Flash 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 for lower cost; pick Ling 3.1 Flash only if the larger context window matters more.
On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.07 (38.7% lower).
Cost-first pickMercury 2.5
Context-first pickLing 3.1 Flash
Sample savings$0.0738.7%
10x traffic gap$0.73
Ling 3.1 Flash has more context, but Mercury 2.5 saves $0.07 on the standard workload. At 10x that traffic, the same price gap is about $0.73. Use the calculator below to replace the sample workload with your own token volume.
Cost sensitivity
Workload Sensitivity
Mercury 2.5 stays cheaper across input-heavy, balanced, and output-heavy sample workloads.
| Workload shape | Token mix | Better pick | Ling 3.1 Flash | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Input-heavy / RAG | 5M input + 500K output | Mercury 2.5 | $0.49 | $0.28 |
| Balanced workload | 1M input + 1M output | Mercury 2.5 | $0.3 | $0.19 |
| Output-heavy chatbot | 1M input + 5M output | Mercury 2.5 | $1.2 | $0.79 |
Mercury 2.5 is $0.08 cheaper per 1M output tokens (33.3% lower; 1.5x difference).
Ling 3.1 Flash has 2.14K more context (1.01x larger).
Mercury 2.5 is $0.07 cheaper on the standard workload (38.7% lower).
Estimate your workload cost
Your Workload Cost
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
Mercury 2.5 has the lower input price; Mercury 2.5 has the lower output price; Ling 3.1 Flash offers the larger context window. For the 1M input plus 500K output sample, Mercury 2.5 is cheaper for the standard workload.
For a 1M input token plus 500K output token workload, the estimated API cost is $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash and $0.11 for Mercury 2.5.
Choose Ling 3.1 Flash when you care most about larger context window.
Choose Mercury 2.5 when you care most about lower input-token price, and lower output-token price.
- On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.07 (38.7% lower).
- Mercury 2.5 is $0.07 cheaper on the standard workload (38.7% lower).
- Mercury 2.5 is $0.03 cheaper per 1M input tokens (46.7% lower; 1.88x difference).
- Mercury 2.5 is $0.08 cheaper per 1M output tokens (33.3% lower; 1.5x difference).
- Ling 3.1 Flash has 2.14K more context (1.01x larger).
| Feature | NewLing 3.1 Flash (inclusionAI) | Mercury 2.5 (Inception) |
|---|---|---|
| Input Price prompt tokens per 1M | $0.075 | $0.04 |
| Completion Price per 1M tokens | $0.225 | $0.15 |
| Sample Workload Cost 1M input + 500K output | $0.19 | $0.11 |
| Context Window | 262.14K | 260K |
| Release Date |
Use-Case Decision Matrix
| Use case | Better pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained production | Mercury 2.5 | On the standard 1M input plus 500K output workload, Mercury 2.5 is estimated at $0.11 vs $0.19 for Ling 3.1 Flash, saving $0.07 (38.7% lower). |
| High-volume input processing | Mercury 2.5 | Lower prompt-token price matters most when prompts, retrieved passages, or documents dominate the bill. |
| Long responses and chatbots | Mercury 2.5 | Lower output-token price matters most when assistants generate many completion tokens. |
| RAG or long-document work | Ling 3.1 Flash | A larger context window leaves more room for retrieved passages, conversation history, or source files. |
Related Alternatives
- Ling 3.0 Flash VL (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Sante (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Flash Fin (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- Ling 3.0 Tiny (free) can replace Ling 3.1 Flash when lower sample workload cost matters most: $0.
- GPT-6 Luna Pro (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- GPT-6 Luna (batch) offers 1.05M context with $0.17 sample workload cost.
- Owl Alpha offers 1.05M context with $0 sample workload cost.
- Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor offers 1.05M context with $0.2 sample workload cost.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash · DeepSeek · #1
- Step 5 Preview · StepFun · #2
- GLM 5.3 Flash · Z.ai · #3
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash · Xiaomi · #4
Cheaper alternatives
Review low-cost models sorted by a standard 1M input plus 500K output workload.
Open cheapest modelsLarger context alternatives
Find models with larger context windows for RAG, long documents, and codebase review.
Open largest context modelsProvider catalogs
Compare models within provider hubs before choosing a final API vendor.
Open provider hubsinclusionAI catalog
Review all tracked inclusionAI models before deciding whether this matchup is the right shortlist.
Open inclusionAI modelsInception catalog
Check other Inception models with comparable pricing, context, or release timing.
Open Inception modelsLing 3.1 Flash is a hybrid reasoning mixture-of-experts model from inclusionAI, with 25B active parameters out of 560B total.
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...