Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs Ring-2.6-1T
Mercury 2.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#242); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2.5 scores higher in 0 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 2 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Ring-2.6-1T leads 26.1 to 22.4.
- Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 36.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 260K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 4 | 3 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Ring-2.6-1T leads
Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), Ring-2.6-1T: 26.1
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 3.7% |
Math Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than Ring-2.6-1T?
Mercury 2.5 has enough public results to be ranked (#242); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Mercury 2.5 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Ring-2.6-1T scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.7 versus 39.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Ring-2.6-1T share?
3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.