# GLM-4.6 vs Mercury 2.5

> GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/glm-4-6-vs-mercury-2-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-4.6 scores higher in 3 categories and Mercury 2.5 in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GLM-4.6 leads 39.1 to 23.3.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.60 / $2.20 for GLM-4.6.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 205K.
- GLM-4.6 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 41.4 | 33.5 |
| Rank | 135 | 242 |
| Context | 205K | 260K |
| Input $/M | $0.60 | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | $2.20 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GLM-4.6: 40.1 (#148)
- Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.4% | 38.5% |
| ALE-Bench | 340.82 | 301.65 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1340 | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1449 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GLM-4.6: 32.3 (#66)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 24.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 72.4% | — |

## Reasoning

- GLM-4.6: 23.7 (#172)
- Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 1.1% | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 47.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1440 | — |

## Math

- GLM-4.6: 39.1 (#111)
- Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LMArena Math | 1432 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 3.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 2.1% | — |

## Knowledge

- GLM-4.6: 40.2 (#124)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.5% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1431 | — |

## Multilingual

- GLM-4.6: 53.5 (#66)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1426 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1499 | — |
| LMArena French | 1459 | — |
| LMArena German | 1447 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1393 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1400 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1419 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1436 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GLM-4.6: 74.3 (#98)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1410 | — |

## Long Context

- GLM-4.6: 43.4 (#94)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GLM-4.6: 61.1 (#90)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | GLM-4.6 | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1411 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1427 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GLM-4.6 better than Mercury 2.5?

GLM-4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.4 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. Mercury 2.5 costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GLM-4.6 or Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6 lists at $0.60 and $2.20.

### Is GLM-4.6 or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (40.1 vs 39.5); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 205K.

### How many benchmarks do GLM-4.6 and Mercury 2.5 share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-4.6 has 29 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.