Model comparison
Llama 13b vs Mercury 2
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 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 2 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury 2 leads 53.8 to 13.8.
- Llama 13b has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 13b | Mercury 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 24.4 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2023-02-24 | 2026-02-20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 50K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.75 |
| Results tracked | 21 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury 2 leads
Llama 13b: 21.4 (#337), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 683 | 1391 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1171 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
Llama 13b: 14.0 (#329), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 728 | 1362 |
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 37.9% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 100.58 | — |
| HellaSwag | 79.2% | — |
| LAMBADA | 75.2% | — |
| PIQA | 80.1% | — |
| WinoGrande | 73% | — |
Math Not comparable
Llama 13b: 26.7 (#256), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 838 | — |
| GSM8K | 20.6% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1358 |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 52.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 78.7% | — |
| MMLU | 47.7% | — |
| OpenBookQA | 56.4% | — |
| TriviaQA | 77.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| ScienceQA | 43.3% | — |
Multilingual Mercury 2 leads
Llama 13b: 16.6 (#297), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 819 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following Mercury 2 leads
Llama 13b: 36.7 (#305), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 781 | 1329 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 13b: —, Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1330 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Llama 13b: 13.8 (#312), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | Llama 13b | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 834 | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 794 | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 753 | 1358 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 13b better than Mercury 2?
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 24.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 13b or Mercury 2 better for coding?
Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 21.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 13b and Mercury 2 share?
7 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 13b has 21 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.