Model comparison
Mercury vs Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 5 categories and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Mercury leads 41.6 to 34.8.
- Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) |
| Noometry Index | 37.6 | 32.7 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 9 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Mercury: 38.7 (#170), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 35.2 (#227)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1210 |
Reasoning Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct leads
Mercury: 17.5 (#293), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 23.6 (#175)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1285 | 1208 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
Math Not comparable
Mercury: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 26.8 (#255)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | — | 16.1% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1208 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury: —, Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 19.5 (#279)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | — | 41.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 28.7% |
Multilingual Mercury leads
Mercury: 41.6 (#206), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 34.8 (#248)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1160 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1192 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1187 |
Instruction Following Mercury leads
Mercury: 65.2 (#224), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 61.5 (#244)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1186 |
| IFEval | — | 78% |
Long Context Mercury leads
Mercury: 38.4 (#198), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 36.2 (#234)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1266 | 1194 |
Writing & Preference Mercury leads
Mercury: 46.2 (#221), Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct: 42.1 (#236)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1218 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1191 | 1199 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1282 | 1221 |
| WildBench | — | 73.4% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury better than Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 32.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury or Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 35.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 2 0325 32b Instruct has 16.