Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs Mixtral 8x22B
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury 2.5 leads 39.5 to 24.2.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $6 for Mixtral 8x22B.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 64K.
- Mixtral 8x22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 27.1 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2024-04-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 260K | 64K |
| Max output | 66K | 64K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 4 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury 2.5 leads
Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156), Mixtral 8x22B: 24.2 (#329)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.5% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 3.2% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 40.6% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1166 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 50.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 72% |
| MBPP+ | — | 64.3% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 23.1 (#127)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 7.5% |
Reasoning Mercury 2.5 leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), Mixtral 8x22B: 19.9 (#248)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1150 |
| DTBench | — | 55.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 122.03 |
| ForecastBench | — | 56.3 |
Math Too close to call
Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), Mixtral 8x22B: 22.9 (#275)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1184 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 24.2% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#293)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 34.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 46% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 33.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1113 |
| MMLU | — | 77.8% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 32.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1128 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1116 |
| LMArena French | — | 1166 |
| LMArena German | — | 1141 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1037 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1057 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1158 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1151 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 57.7 (#266)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 72.4% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1147 |
Long Context Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 34.7 (#247)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1144 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Mixtral 8x22B: 36.9 (#262)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Mixtral 8x22B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1162 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1141 |
| WildBench | — | 71.1% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1130 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than Mixtral 8x22B?
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Mixtral 8x22B?
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Mixtral 8x22B lists at $2 and $6.
Is Mercury 2.5 or Mixtral 8x22B better for coding?
Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 24.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 64K.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Mixtral 8x22B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and Mixtral 8x22B has 34.