# Mercury 2 vs Qwen3 8B

> Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-2-vs-qwen3-8b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 3

## Summary

- They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury 2 scores higher in 3 categories and Qwen3 8B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Mercury 2 leads 23.8 to 16.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 38.7% for Mercury 2 and 22.6% for Qwen3 8B.
- Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.75 for Mercury 2.
- Qwen3 8B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.
- Qwen3 8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 33.7 |
| Rank | 175 | 238 |
| Context | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $0.25 | $0.18 |
| Output $/M | $0.75 | $0.70 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)
- Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 38.7% | 22.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | — |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1391 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 785.58 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Mercury 2: —
- Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 42.6% |

## Reasoning

- Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)
- Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0.8% | 0% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1362 | — |
| DTBench | — | 59.7% |
| LMCA | — | 8.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 136.17 |

## Math

- Mercury 2: —
- Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 56.1% |

## Knowledge

- Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)
- Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12.3% | 4.8% |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1358 | — |

## Multilingual

- Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)
- Qwen3 8B: —

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1331 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1304 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)
- Qwen3 8B: —

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1329 | — |

## Long Context

- Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)
- Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 62.1% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1330 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)
- Qwen3 8B: —

| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 8B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1355 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1289 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1358 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury 2 better than Qwen3 8B?

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 lists at $0.25 and $0.75.

### Is Mercury 2 or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (33.5 vs 34.0); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 8B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury 2 and Qwen3 8B share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2 has 17 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.