# Mercury vs Qwen2.5-Max

> Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-vs-qwen2-5-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen2.5-Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen2.5-Max leads 55.6 to 46.2.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 40.1 |
| Rank | 192 | 142 |
| Context | — | — |
| Input $/M | — | — |
| Output $/M | — | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.2 (#118)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1323 | 1359 |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 64.4% |

## Reasoning

- Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 24.6 (#144)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1360 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 51.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 67.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 132.54 |
| LiveBench | — | 62.3% |

## Math

- Mercury: —
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.3 (#162)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1369 |

## Knowledge

- Mercury: —
- Qwen2.5-Max: 34.8 (#181)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| Confabulations | — | 21.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1337 |

## Multilingual

- Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 48.3 (#140)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1259 | 1352 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1382 |
| LMArena French | — | 1396 |
| LMArena German | — | 1350 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1299 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1304 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1353 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1377 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 71.5 (#147)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1238 | 1335 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 75.3% |

## Long Context

- Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 41.3 (#137)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1264 | 1358 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
- Qwen2.5-Max: 55.6 (#141)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen2.5-Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1367 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1339 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1283 | 1364 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 72.9% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 56.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury better than Qwen2.5-Max?

Qwen2.5-Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.1 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Mercury or Qwen2.5-Max better for coding?

Qwen2.5-Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.2 versus 38.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen2.5-Max share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Max has 27.