Model comparison

Llama 4 Scout vs Mercury

Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Llama 4 Scout Meta

27.7

Rank #330 Confirmed

Mercury Inception

37.6

Rank #199 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 4 Scout scores higher in 1 category and Mercury in 5 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury leads 38.7 to 20.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 36.9% for Llama 4 Scout and 21.6% for Mercury.
  • Llama 4 Scout has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 4 Scout and Mercury specifications
Llama 4 ScoutMercury
ProviderMetaInception
Noometry Index27.737.6
Released2025-04-05—
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.10—
Output $ / M tokens$0.30—
Results tracked439

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

Category by category

Coding Mercury leads

Llama 4 Scout: 20.2 (#339), Mercury: 38.7 (#170)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Coding12861322
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)9.1%—
SciCode17%—
BigCodeBench Complete43.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 4 Scout: 24.6 (#119), Mercury: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard28.1%—

Reasoning Mercury leads

Llama 4 Scout: 9.1 (#345), Mercury: 17.5 (#293)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
Kagi LLM Benchmark36.9%21.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts12661285
ARC-AGI-20%—
ARC-AGI-10.5%—
CritPt0%—
DTBench57.9%—
LMCA12%—
Epoch Capabilities Index129.64—
ForecastBench57.5—

Math Not comparable

Llama 4 Scout: 19.6 (#286), Mercury: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20257.8%—
Omni-MATH37.3%—
LMArena Math1287—
MATH Level 562.3%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 4 Scout: 31.9 (#217), Mercury: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
GPQA Diamond51.8%—
MMLU-Pro74.2%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.7%—
GPQA (HELM)50.7%—
LMArena Expert1235—

Multimodal Not comparable

Llama 4 Scout: 32.2 (#102), Mercury: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Vision1118—
SpatialViz-Bench34.2%—

Multilingual Too close to call

Llama 4 Scout: 41.0 (#212), Mercury: 41.6 (#206)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Non-English12521260
LMArena Chinese1255—
LMArena French1282—
LMArena German1272—
LMArena Japanese1206—
LMArena Korean1207—
LMArena Russian1263—
LMArena Spanish1278—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Llama 4 Scout: 65.8 (#217), Mercury: 65.2 (#224)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Instruction Following12481239
IFEval81.8%—

Long Context Mercury leads

Llama 4 Scout: 27.5 (#294), Mercury: 38.4 (#198)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Longer Query12651266
Fiction.LiveBench36%—

Writing & Preference Mercury leads

Llama 4 Scout: 37.0 (#261), Mercury: 46.2 (#221)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 4 ScoutMercury
LMArena Text12791282
LMArena Creative Writing12491191
LMArena Multi-Turn12801282
EQ-Bench Creative Writing783—
WildBench78%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 4 Scout better than Mercury?

Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 4 Scout or Mercury better for coding?

Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 4 Scout and Mercury share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 4 Scout has 43 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper