Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch or computer use and gui automation (61.4% osworld at launch). Pick Mercury 2.5 Preview for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation or coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models). On a tight budget at scale, Mercury 2.5 Preview is the value pick.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Mercury 2.5 Preview (Inception Labs) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is september 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Mercury 2.5 Preview is inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: Mercury 2.5 Preview is about 75× cheaper on input ($0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens vs $3/$15 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
Context window: Mercury 2.5 Preview holds 1.3× more — 260K tokens (~390 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Mercury 2.5 Preview is the newer model by about 11 months (released August 31, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Mercury 2.5 Preview
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Inception Labs (US)
Released
September 29, 2025
August 31, 2026
Context window
200K (~300 pages)
260K tokens (~390 pages)
Price (in/out)
$3/$15 per 1M tokens
$0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
77.2%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — Mercury 2.5 Preview is comparatively weak here — 260K context window is far shorter than frontier 1M-token models
Computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch): Claude Sonnet 4.5 — Mercury 2.5 Preview is comparatively weak here — current $0.04/$0.15 pricing includes a limited-time launch promotion on OpenRouter (list price is $0.20/$0.75, may rise after Sept 8, 2026)
Long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks among its strengths; Mercury 2.5 Preview does not.
Very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation: Mercury 2.5 Preview — Its 260K tokens window holds about 1.3× more than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K in a single prompt.
Coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models): Mercury 2.5 Preview — At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($3/$15 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Mathematics accuracy (97.0%, 97th percentile): Mercury 2.5 Preview — Inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality — and it runs cheaper at $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens.
Lowest cost at scale: Mercury 2.5 Preview — At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input: Mercury 2.5 Preview — Its 260K tokens window is about 1.3× larger than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K, fitting roughly 390 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: Mercury 2.5 Preview — At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Mercury 2.5 Preview — Larger 260K tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch: Claude Sonnet 4.5 — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation: Mercury 2.5 Preview — That is its strongest area.
Claude Sonnet 4.5: where it fits
September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Released September 29, 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch), long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks, and tracking its own remaining token budget natively, which few models do.
Its trade-offs are real: superseded twice — Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 5 match or beat it at the same or lower price, capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard, and missing the modern API surface: no adaptive thinking, no effort control, and half the max output of newer Sonnets. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Mercury 2.5 Preview: where it fits
Inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality. Released August 31, 2026 by Inception Labs, it is built for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation, coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models), mathematics accuracy (97.0%, 97th percentile), and tunable reasoning levels with parallel tool calls and schema-aligned JSON output.
Its trade-offs: 260K context window is far shorter than frontier 1M-token models, no vision or audio modalities, positioned only against cost-optimized models (GPT-5.6 Luna Low, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite), not frontier-class, and current $0.04/$0.15 pricing includes a limited-time launch promotion on OpenRouter (list price is $0.20/$0.75, may rise after Sept 8, 2026). At $0.04 in / $0.15 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Mercury 2.5 Preview costs less per token; Mercury 2.5 Preview holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, Mercury 2.5 Preview for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Mercury 2.5 Preview, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 4.5 leans toward agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch while Mercury 2.5 Preview leans toward very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview?
Mercury 2.5 Preview is cheaper — $3/$15 per 1M tokens vs $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens, roughly 75× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mercury 2.5 Preview — 260K tokens vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 4.5, Mercury 2.5 Preview and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview?
Mercury 2.5 Preview — released August 31, 2026, about 11 months after Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Mercury 2.5 Preview
Anthropic · US | Inception Labs · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch or computer use and gui automation (61.4% osworld at launch). Pick Mercury 2.5 Preview for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation or coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models). On a tight budget at scale, Mercury 2.5 Preview is the value pick.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 (Anthropic) and Mercury 2.5 Preview (Inception Labs) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is september 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Mercury 2.5 Preview is inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: Mercury 2.5 Preview is about 75× cheaper on input ($0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens vs $3/$15 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
▸Context window: Mercury 2.5 Preview holds 1.3× more — 260K tokens (~390 pages) vs 200K (~300 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Mercury 2.5 Preview is the newer model by about 11 months (released August 31, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Mercury 2.5 Preview
Provider
Anthropic (US)
Inception Labs (US)
Released
September 29, 2025
August 31, 2026
Context window
200K (~300 pages)
260K tokens (~390 pages)
Price (in/out)
$3/$15 per 1M tokens
$0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
No — API only
No — API only
Modalities
text, image, code
text
SWE-Bench Verified
77.2%
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Mercury 2.5 Preview is comparatively weak here — 260K context window is far shorter than frontier 1M-token models
Computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch)
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Mercury 2.5 Preview is comparatively weak here — current $0.04/$0.15 pricing includes a limited-time launch promotion on OpenRouter (list price is $0.20/$0.75, may rise after Sept 8, 2026)
Long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks
Claude Sonnet 4.5
Claude Sonnet 4.5 lists long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks among its strengths; Mercury 2.5 Preview does not.
Very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation
Mercury 2.5 Preview
Its 260K tokens window holds about 1.3× more than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K in a single prompt.
Coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models)
Mercury 2.5 Preview
At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5 ($3/$15 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Mathematics accuracy (97.0%, 97th percentile)
Mercury 2.5 Preview
Inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality — and it runs cheaper at $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens.
Lowest cost at scale
Mercury 2.5 Preview
At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Mercury 2.5 Preview
Its 260K tokens window is about 1.3× larger than Claude Sonnet 4.5's 200K, fitting roughly 390 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Mercury 2.5 Preview
At $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 4.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Mercury 2.5 Preview
Larger 260K tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch
→ Claude Sonnet 4.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation
→ Mercury 2.5 Preview
That is its strongest area.
Claude Sonnet 4.5: where it fits
September 2025's coding state of the art at $3/$15 — still supported, but 200K-capped and twice superseded. Released September 29, 2025 by Anthropic, it is built for agentic coding — 77.2% on SWE-Bench Verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, computer use and GUI automation (61.4% OSWorld at launch), long-horizon autonomy — Anthropic reported 30+ hours of sustained focus on multi-step tasks, and tracking its own remaining token budget natively, which few models do.
Its trade-offs are real: superseded twice — Sonnet 4.6 and Sonnet 5 match or beat it at the same or lower price, capped at 200K since Anthropic retired its 1M beta in April 2026, while its successors ship 1M as standard, and missing the modern API surface: no adaptive thinking, no effort control, and half the max output of newer Sonnets. At $3 in / $15 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Mercury 2.5 Preview: where it fits
Inception Labs' August 31, 2026 diffusion-based language model preview, refining tokens in parallel for roughly 10x the throughput of comparable autoregressive models at cost-optimized-tier quality. Released August 31, 2026 by Inception Labs, it is built for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation, coding accuracy (95.7%, 91st percentile among cost-optimized models), mathematics accuracy (97.0%, 97th percentile), and tunable reasoning levels with parallel tool calls and schema-aligned JSON output.
Its trade-offs: 260K context window is far shorter than frontier 1M-token models, no vision or audio modalities, positioned only against cost-optimized models (GPT-5.6 Luna Low, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite), not frontier-class, and current $0.04/$0.15 pricing includes a limited-time launch promotion on OpenRouter (list price is $0.20/$0.75, may rise after Sept 8, 2026). At $0.04 in / $0.15 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Mercury 2.5 Preview costs less per token; Mercury 2.5 Preview holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Sonnet 4.5 for agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch, Mercury 2.5 Preview for very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation. Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Mercury 2.5 Preview, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 4.5 leans toward agentic coding — 77.2% on swe-bench verified, the best score any model had posted at its launch while Mercury 2.5 Preview leans toward very high inference throughput (1,107 tok/s) via diffusion-based parallel token generation, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview?
Mercury 2.5 Preview is cheaper — $3/$15 per 1M tokens vs $0.04/$0.15 per 1M tokens, roughly 75× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mercury 2.5 Preview — 260K tokens vs 200K, about 1.3× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 4.5 and Mercury 2.5 Preview together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 4.5, Mercury 2.5 Preview and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Mercury 2.5 Preview?
Mercury 2.5 Preview — released August 31, 2026, about 11 months after Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.