Model comparison

DeepSeek LLM 67B vs Mercury 2

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek LLM 67B DeepSeek

24.9

Rank #347 Confirmed

Mercury 2 Inception

39.1

Rank #175 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek LLM 67B scores higher in 0 categories and Mercury 2 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Mercury 2 leads 36.2 to 7.0.
  • DeepSeek LLM 67B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek LLM 67B and Mercury 2 specifications
DeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
ProviderDeepSeekInception
Noometry Index24.939.1
Released2023-11-292026-02-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—128K
Max output—50K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.25
Output $ / M tokens—$0.75
Results tracked1517

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.9 (#278), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Coding10961391
LMArena WebDev—1171
SciCode—38.7%
WeirdML—43.2%
ALE-Bench—785.58

Reasoning Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 16.5 (#304), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Hard Prompts10701362
CritPt—0.8%
Chess Puzzles0%—
Epoch Capabilities Index110.5—

Math Not comparable

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 8.7 (#324), Mercury 2: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20250.8%—
LMArena Math1108—
MATH Level 56.4%—

Knowledge Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 7.0 (#313), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
GPQA Diamond24.6%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.3%
LMArena Expert—1358

Multilingual Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 29.4 (#267), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Non-English10731331
LMArena Chinese11321417
LMArena Russian—1304

Instruction Following Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 55.4 (#277), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Instruction Following10791329

Long Context Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 33.1 (#265), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Longer Query10921330

Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads

DeepSeek LLM 67B: 31.6 (#282), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek LLM 67BMercury 2
LMArena Text11051355
LMArena Creative Writing10671289
LMArena Multi-Turn10821358

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B better than Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

Is DeepSeek LLM 67B or Mercury 2 better for coding?

Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek LLM 67B and Mercury 2 share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek LLM 67B has 15 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper