Skip to content
ModelCap

Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with Mercury 2.5 and EXAONE 4.0.1 32B, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

Current public data

Mercury 2.5 vs EXAONE 4.0.1 32B

Live dataset updated 9/13/2026, 2:40:29 PM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt
Factual comparison of Mercury 2.5 and EXAONE 4.0.1 32B
Field
Mercury 2.5

Inception Labs

EXAONE 4.0.1 32B

LGAI EXAONE

ModelCap position#121#122
Index score37.336.9
EvidenceEstimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 186 held-out anchors (23%); opens from measured predecessor inception/mercury-2 (77%); shrunk 4.4 up toward the measured corpusEstimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 186 held-out anchors (9%); launch card against 7 resolved peers on 8 rows (91%); optimism haircut 0 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 1.5 up toward the measured corpus
Input / 1M$0.04Unavailable
Output / 1M$0.15Unavailable
Pricing statusfreshunavailable
Context260K
Providers10
Weight accessAPI onlyRestricted license

Decision facts

  • Mercury 2.5 is #121; EXAONE 4.0.1 32B is #122 on the same current language board.
  • Index scores are 37.3 for Mercury 2.5 and 36.9 for EXAONE 4.0.1 32B. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
  • Both positions use Estimated evidence.
  • Weight access differs: Mercury 2.5 is none; EXAONE 4.0.1 32B is restricted.
  • ModelCap currently lists 1 providers for Mercury 2.5 and 0 for EXAONE 4.0.1 32B.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.