Model comparison
Mercury 2 vs Qwen1.5-72B
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen1.5-72B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Mercury 2 leads 36.2 to 11.5.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 30.8 |
| Released | 2026-02-20 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 50K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.25 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.75 | — |
| Results tracked | 17 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255), Qwen1.5-72B: 31.9 (#277)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | 1165 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | — |
| SciCode | 38.7% | — |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| ALE-Bench | 785.58 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170), Qwen1.5-72B: 22.2 (#203)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1362 | 1148 |
| CritPt | 0.8% | — |
Math Not comparable
Mercury 2: —, Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1164 |
Knowledge Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172), Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#300)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1358 | 1136 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.3% | — |
Multilingual Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157), Qwen1.5-72B: 33.2 (#253)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1417 | 1186 |
| LMArena Russian | 1304 | 1104 |
| LMArena French | — | 1159 |
| LMArena German | — | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1050 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |
Instruction Following Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165), Qwen1.5-72B: 59.3 (#256)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | 1141 |
Long Context Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154), Qwen1.5-72B: 35.1 (#243)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1330 | 1157 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155), Qwen1.5-72B: 37.3 (#258)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1355 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1289 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1358 | 1160 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2 better than Qwen1.5-72B?
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury 2 or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?
Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 31.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2 and Qwen1.5-72B share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.