# Mercury vs Qwen1.5-72B

> Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-vs-qwen1-5-72b
- 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 Qwen1.5-72B in 1 category; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury leads 46.2 to 37.4.
- Qwen1.5-72B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 30.3 |
| Rank | 192 | 282 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 31.4 (#272)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1323 | 1166 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.2% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 40.3% |
| HumanEval+ | — | 59.1% |
| MBPP+ | — | 61.6% |

## Reasoning

- Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 21.2 (#201)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1148 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |

## Math

- Mercury: —
- Qwen1.5-72B: 30.7 (#205)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | — | 1164 |

## Knowledge

- Mercury: —
- Qwen1.5-72B: 11.5 (#295)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 28.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1136 |

## Multilingual

- Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 33.4 (#248)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1259 | 1135 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1186 |
| LMArena French | — | 1158 |
| LMArena German | — | 1084 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1061 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1049 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1104 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1110 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 59.6 (#251)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1238 | 1142 |

## Long Context

- Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 35.0 (#238)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1264 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
- Qwen1.5-72B: 37.4 (#253)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen1.5-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1166 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1137 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1283 | 1160 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury better than Qwen1.5-72B?

Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Mercury or Qwen1.5-72B better for coding?

Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 31.4 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen1.5-72B share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-72B has 22.