Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen1.5-32B
Qwen1.5-32B has enough public results to be ranked (#288); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen1.5-32B leads 30.5 to 22.4.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 30.2 | 30.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 260K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 2 | 21 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1131 |
Math Qwen1.5-32B leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4, Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1176 |
| LMArena French | — | 1100 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1116 |
Long Context Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1146 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1140 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than Qwen1.5-32B?
Qwen1.5-32B has enough public results to be ranked (#288); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Qwen1.5-32B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 2 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.