Compare / Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Mercury 3
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Mercury 3
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 56 results on 4 sources that measured both models.
GoogleGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
InceptionMercury 3
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite wins 1514 too close to callMercury 3 wins 27
Of the 56 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 20 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-20-96eb40c3ec63).
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3? The short answer
Pick Mercury 3: it scores higher (Spring Prompt overall 39 against 25) at about the same price.
- Spring Prompt overall: Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite 25, Mercury 3 39 (out of 100; how the score works).
- They cost about the same to run: $0.013 and $0.012 per deck on DeckBench.
- Mercury 3 is newer: released 19 Oct 2026, against 21 Jul 2026 for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
- On our own benchmarks, on the results both models have: Mercury 3 does better for marketing planning.
Head to head
25
Spring Prompt overall
39
$0.85
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$0.33
1,048,576
Context window, tokens
1,000,000
Every fact side by side
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Mercury 3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.30 in · $2.50 out | $0.20 in · $0.70 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.85 | $0.33 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.85 (Google) | – |
| Cost per deck (DeckBench) | $0.013 | $0.012 |
| Cached input, per million | $0.030 cached input | $0.020 cached input |
| Intelligence Index | 22.2 | – |
| Spring Prompt overall | 25 | 39 |
| Output speed, tokens a second | 398 | – |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Released | 21 Jul 2026 | 19 Oct 2026 (newer) |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Developer based in | the US | the US |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live
19 of 24
not measured
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is
21 of 24
18 of 24
User surveysPlanning a user survey and reading its results without being misled
10 of 13
9 of 13
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending
20 of 24
18 of 24
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls
77 of 168
not measured
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects
46 of 51
not measured
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge
94 of 202
not measured
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality
50 of 189
not measured
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers
63 of 153
not measured
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess)
2 of 27
10 of 27
From our research
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Mercury 3 |
|---|---|---|
| BulletBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per game · Bullet 60sUS dollars, lower is better 16 · 7 of 32 measured | $0.0058 | $0.0020no reasoning |
| Ladder Elo · Bullet 60sladder Elo, higher is better 5 · 15 of 32 measured | 780 | 491no reasoning |
| Ladder Elo · Lightning 10+1ladder Elo, higher is better 1 · 12 of 24 measured | 892 | 555no reasoning |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per deckUS dollars, lower is better 5 · 4 of 24 measured | $0.0126 | $0.0116 |
| Deck ratingrating, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 21 · 18 of 24 measured | 674 | 812 |
| Accurate decks% of tasks, higher is better 20 · 20 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Overall scorescore out of 100, higher is better 20 · 18 of 24 measured | 25.4 | 26.1 |
| Audience scorescore out of 100, higher is better 19 · 21 of 24 measured | 45.0 | 43.2 |
| Business scorescore out of 100, higher is better 22 · 18 of 24 measured | 12.6 | 17.6 |
| SurveyBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Analysis ratingrating, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other analysis was; the win rate counts wins against whichever analyses a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 10 · 9 of 13 measured | 666 | 752 |
| Cost per taskUS dollars, lower is better 1 · 3 of 12 measured | $0.0144 | $0.0216 |
| Analysis scorepoints of 100, higher is better 11 · 12 of 13 measured | 56.7 | 42.2 |
Show all 56 results (44 more)
| Measure | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Mercury 3 |
|---|---|---|
| BulletBench measured by Spring Prompt · 7 results | ||
| Cost per game · Lightning 10+1US dollars, lower is better 15 · 5 of 24 measured | $0.0070 | $0.0010no reasoning |
| Games lost on time · Bullet 60s% of games, lower is better 1 · 1 of 32 measured | 0.0% | 0.0%no reasoning |
| Games lost on time · Lightning 10+1% of games, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0%no reasoning |
| Invalid moves · Bullet 60s% of moves, lower is better 1 · 1 of 32 measured | 0.0% | 0.0%low reasoning |
| Invalid moves · Lightning 10+1% of moves, lower is better 1 · 18 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.4%no reasoning |
| Median move time · Bullet 60smilliseconds, lower is better 15 · 3 of 32 measured | 0.9 s | 0.4 sno reasoning |
| Median move time · Lightning 10+1milliseconds, lower is better 15 · 3 of 24 measured | 0.9 s | 0.4 sno reasoning |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 14 results | ||
| Caveat dropped% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 12 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 16.7% |
| Clean layout% of tasks, higher is better 14 · 6 of 24 measured | 33.3% | 66.7% |
| Design quality% of the maximum, higher is better 15 · 16 of 24 measured | 60.2% | 58.5% |
| Draft figure quoted% of tasks, lower is better 19 · 12 of 24 measured | 50.0% | 33.3% |
| Findings missing% of tasks, lower is better 23 · 17 of 24 measured | 33.3% | 16.7% |
| Head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 21 · 16 of 24 measured | 29.9% | 44.0% |
| Layout defects% of tasks, lower is better 14 · 6 of 24 measured | 66.7% | 33.3% |
| Misleading metric used% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 22 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 16.7% |
| Presentable decks% of tasks, higher is better 12 · 12 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Recommendation late or wrong% of tasks, lower is better 22 · 22 of 24 measured | 83.3% | 83.3% |
| Slides needing work% of tasks, lower is better 2 · 7 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 33.3% |
| Time per deckseconds, lower is better 1 · 9 of 24 measured | 15.2 | 83.3 |
| Unsupported claims% of tasks, lower is better 11 · 11 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 16.7% |
| Unsupported numbers% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 20 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 16.7% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 6 results | ||
| Consistency scorescore out of 100, higher is better 14 · 19 of 24 measured | 21.8 | 15.1 |
| Contribution profitsimulated US dollars, higher is better 21 · 18 of 24 measured | $11,834 | $104,868 |
| Cost of a runUS dollars, lower is better 5 · 6 of 24 measured | $0.0390 | $0.0533 |
| Months over budgetmonths of 12, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0 | 0 |
| Planning scorescore out of 100, higher is better 7 · 23 of 24 measured | 54.9 | 53.8 |
| Return on ad spendprofit per $1 spent, higher is better 21 · 18 of 24 measured | $0.01 | $0.10 |
| SurveyBench measured by Spring Prompt · 17 results | ||
| Head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other analysis was; the win rate counts wins against whichever analyses a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 10 · 6 of 13 measured | 27.1% | 48.6% |
| Leading or double-barrelled questions% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 8 of 13 measured | 77.8% | 55.6% |
| Mistaken next steps% of tasks, lower is better 9 · 5 of 13 measured | 44.4% | 22.2% |
| Numbers right% of answers, higher is better 10 · 13 of 13 measured | 75.5% | 63.3% |
| Objectives unanswerable% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 1 of 13 measured | 33.3% | 0.0% |
| Precision ignored% of tasks, lower is better 11 · 1 of 13 measured | 100.0% | 0.0% |
| Research scorepoints of 100, higher is better 12 · 11 of 13 measured | 55.6 | 56.8 |
| Sound research% of tasks, higher is better 6 · 6 of 13 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Stakeholder's view presumed% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 7 of 13 measured | 55.6% | 22.2% |
| Survey plan scorepoints of 100, higher is better 12 · 6 of 13 measured | 53.1 | 90.8 |
| Survey structure% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 7 of 13 measured | 55.6% | 22.2% |
| Time per taskseconds, lower is better 1 · 10 of 12 measured | 16.3 | 194 |
| Traps handled% of traps, higher is better 13 · 11 of 13 measured | 56.5% | 60.7% |
| Traps missed% of tasks, lower is better 10 · 7 of 13 measured | 100.0% | 88.9% |
| Unsupported findings% of tasks, lower is better 6 · 4 of 13 measured | 66.7% | 44.4% |
| Wrong numbers% of tasks, lower is better 11 · 9 of 13 measured | 100.0% | 44.4% |
| Wrong recommendation% of tasks, lower is better 7 · 12 of 13 measured | 22.2% | 77.8% |
Compare them with other models
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Claude Opus 5.5Most intelligent available today
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashHighest-scoring overall at $0.25–1 per million tokens
- Mercury 3 vs Claude Opus 5.5Highest-scoring overall available today
- Mercury 3 vs GPT-6 LunaJust above overall
- Mercury 3 vs GLM-5.3Just below overall
Quick answers
Is Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite better than Mercury 3?
Pick Mercury 3: it scores higher (Spring Prompt overall 39 against 25) at about the same price.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
They cost about the same to run: $0.013 and $0.012 per deck on DeckBench.
Which is better for decks from an analysis, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
Mercury 3 ranks 18 of 24 models on sale for turning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is, against 21 for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
Which is better for user surveys, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
Mercury 3 ranks 9 of 13 models on sale for planning a user survey and reading its results without being misled, against 10 for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
Which is better for marketing planning, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
Mercury 3 ranks 18 of 24 models on sale for planning a year of ad spend without overspending, against 20 for Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite.
Which is better for speed under pressure, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite ranks 2 of 27 models on sale for good decisions against a real clock (fast chess), against 10 for Mercury 3.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Mercury 3?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Mercury 3.
Run Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite and Mercury 3 on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.