# Mercury vs Qwen1.5-32B

> Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-vs-qwen1-5-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-32B in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury leads 46.2 to 34.4.
- Qwen1.5-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 30.0 |
| Rank | 192 | 288 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.1 (#278)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1323 | 1155 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 32.3% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 42% |

## Reasoning

- Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 20.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1131 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |

## Math

- Mercury: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 30.5 (#207)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |

## Knowledge

- Mercury: —
- Qwen1.5-32B: 13.5 (#291)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 30.7% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1126 |
| MMLU | — | 74.4% |

## Multilingual

- Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 31.6 (#254)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1259 | 1106 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1176 |
| LMArena French | — | 1100 |
| LMArena German | — | 1058 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1027 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1007 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1073 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1089 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 58.0 (#260)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1238 | 1116 |

## Long Context

- Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.7 (#241)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1264 | 1146 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
- Qwen1.5-32B: 34.4 (#266)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1137 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1083 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1283 | 1140 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury better than Qwen1.5-32B?

Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Mercury or Qwen1.5-32B better for coding?

Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 31.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen1.5-32B share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-32B has 21.