Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Mercury
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 7 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 7 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 13b scores higher in 0 categories and Mercury in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury leads 46.2 to 13.9.
- Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Mercury | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 23.9 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 21 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Llama 13b: 20.9 (#332), Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1323 |
Reasoning Mercury leads
Llama 13b: 13.4 (#327), Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1284 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 21.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.09 | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Not comparable
Llama 13b: 24.4 (#259), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | — |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Mercury leads
Llama 13b: 16.8 (#292), Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1259 |
Instruction Following Mercury leads
Llama 13b: 36.9 (#300), Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1238 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1264 |
Writing & Preference Mercury leads
Llama 13b: 13.9 (#307), Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1186 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1283 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Mercury?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 23.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Mercury better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 20.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Mercury share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.