Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Mercury
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 1 category and Mercury in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Mercury leads 38.4 to 23.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 33.3% for GPT-4.1 nano and 21.6% for Mercury.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 37.6 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | — |
| Max output | 33K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.10 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.40 | — |
| Results tracked | 38 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330), Mercury: 38.7 (#170)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | 1322 |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| SciCode | 25.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |
Reasoning Mercury leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349), Mercury: 17.5 (#293)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | 21.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | 1285 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LMCA | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | — |
Math Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205), Mercury: 41.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1260 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | — |
| LMArena German | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1198 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-4.1 nano leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193), Mercury: 65.2 (#224)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | 1239 |
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
Long Context Mercury leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296), Mercury: 38.4 (#198)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | 1266 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
Writing & Preference Mercury leads
GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243), Mercury: 46.2 (#221)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | 1191 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | 1282 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | — |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Mercury?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is GPT-4.1 nano or Mercury better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Mercury share?
9 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.