Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury 2.5 leads 39.5 to 29.1.
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 28.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 260K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 4 | 13 |
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), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 999 |
| ALE-Bench | 301.65 | — |
Reasoning Mercury 2.5 leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 976 |
Math Qwen1.5 4b Chat leads
Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1026 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 980 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1024 |
| LMArena German | — | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 952 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 978 |
Long Context Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 988 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 977 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury 2.5 or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?
Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.