Model comparison
Mercury vs Qwen3 8B
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury leads 38.7 to 34.0.
- Qwen3 8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury | Qwen3 8B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.6 | 33.7 |
| Released | — | 2025-04 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 8K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.18 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.70 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Mercury: 38.7 (#170), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 22.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 42.6% |
Reasoning Too close to call
Mercury: 17.5 (#293), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1285 | — |
| DTBench | — | 59.7% |
| LMCA | — | 8.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 136.17 |
Math Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 56.1% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 4.8% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Mercury: 41.6 (#206), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Mercury: 65.2 (#224), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Mercury: 38.4 (#198), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.1% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1266 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Mercury: 46.2 (#221), Qwen3 8B: —
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1191 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1282 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury better than Qwen3 8B?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury or Qwen3 8B better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen3 8B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.