Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with Mercury 2.5 and Fara1.5 4B, 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.

First modelSecond model

Current public data

Mercury 2.5 vs Fara1.5 4B

Live dataset updated 9/9/2026, 8:46:14 PM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt

Factual comparison of Mercury 2.5 and Fara1.5 4B
Field	Mercury 2.5 Inception Labs	Fara1.5 4B Microsoft
ModelCap position	#111	#112
Index score	37.3	37.2
Evidence	Estimatedglobal-corpus-prior over 182 held-out anchors (23%); opens from measured predecessor inception/mercury-2 (78%); shrunk 4.7 up toward the measured corpus	Inheritedfinetune of Qwen/Qwen3.5-4B · finetune (100%)
Input / 1M	$0.04	Unavailable
Output / 1M	$0.15	Unavailable
Pricing status	fresh	unavailable
Context	260K	—
Providers	1	0
Weight access	API only	Open weights

Decision facts

Mercury 2.5 is #111; Fara1.5 4B is #112 on the same current language board.
Index scores are 37.3 for Mercury 2.5 and 37.2 for Fara1.5 4B. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
Evidence differs: Mercury 2.5 is Estimated; Fara1.5 4B is Inherited.
Weight access differs: Mercury 2.5 is none; Fara1.5 4B is open.
ModelCap currently lists 1 providers for Mercury 2.5 and 0 for Fara1.5 4B.

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

Popular comparisons

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.