# 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.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-2-5-vs-ring-2-6-1t
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## 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.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 36.9 |
| Rank | 242 | — |
| Context | 260K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.04 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)
- Ring-2.6-1T: 40.7

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.5% | 42.4% |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | 432.57 |

## Reasoning

- 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

- Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)
- Ring-2.6-1T: —

| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |

## FAQ

### 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.