Model comparison
Granite 4.0 H Small vs Mercury 2.5
Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Granite 4.0 H Small leads 31.4 to 23.3.
- Granite 4.0 H Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 33.5 |
| Released | — | 2026-09-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 260K |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 4 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury 2.5 leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 36.4 (#209), Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 38.5% |
| LMArena Coding | 1249 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |
Reasoning Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 24.4 (#163), Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1240 | — |
Math Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Granite 4.0 H Small: 31.4 (#223), Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| Omni-MATH | 29.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1247 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Granite 4.0 H Small: 32.0 (#215), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 56.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 5.2% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 38.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1251 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 4.0 H Small: 38.6 (#228), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1249 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1201 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1258 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Granite 4.0 H Small: 68.7 (#183), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1222 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 4.0 H Small: 37.7 (#213), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1242 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Granite 4.0 H Small: 43.8 (#227), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 H Small | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1241 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1211 | — |
| WildBench | 73.9% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1242 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.0 H Small better than Mercury 2.5?
Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 4.0 H Small or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?
Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 36.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.0 H Small and Mercury 2.5 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.0 H Small has 19 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.