Model comparison
Mercury vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 39.3 to 17.5.
Side by side
| Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.6 | 45.3 |
| Released | — | 2026-06-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Mercury: 38.7 (#170), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Mercury: 17.5 (#293), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1285 | 1460 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| DTBench | — | 84% |
| LMCA | — | 37.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.37 |
Math Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1466 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1467 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Mercury: 41.6 (#206), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1510 |
| LMArena French | — | 1473 |
| LMArena German | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1457 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Mercury: 65.2 (#224), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1440 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Mercury: 38.4 (#198), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1266 | 1455 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Mercury: 46.2 (#221), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1191 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1282 | 1460 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury better than Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 36.6 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen3.7 Plus share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.