Model comparison

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct vs Mercury 2

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct IBM

30.8

Rank #286 Confirmed

Mercury 2 Inception

39.1

Rank #175 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Mercury 2 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury 2 leads 53.8 to 29.6.
  • Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Mercury 2 specifications
Granite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
ProviderIBMInception
Noometry Index30.839.1
Released—2026-02-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—128K
Max output—50K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.25
Output $ / M tokens—$0.75
Results tracked1317

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

Category by category

Coding Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Coding10901391
LMArena WebDev—1171
SciCode—38.7%
WeirdML—43.2%
BigCodeBench Instruct20.5%—
ALE-Bench—785.58

Reasoning Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Hard Prompts10731362
CritPt—0.8%

Math Not comparable

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217), Mercury 2: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Math1117—

Knowledge Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Expert10641358
Vectara Hallucination Rate—12.3%

Multilingual Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Non-English10331331
LMArena Chinese10701417
LMArena Russian10451304

Instruction Following Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Instruction Following10561329

Long Context Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Longer Query10701330

Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMercury 2
LMArena Text10801355
LMArena Creative Writing10461289
LMArena Multi-Turn10531358

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better than Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct or Mercury 2 better for coding?

Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 28.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Mercury 2 share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper