# Mercury vs Qwen3.5-Flash

> Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/mercury-vs-qwen3-5-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 8

## Summary

- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 32.9 to 16.8.

## Snapshot

| | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 42.3 |
| Rank | 192 | 105 |
| Context | — | 1M |
| Input $/M | — | $0.10 |
| Output $/M | — | $0.40 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.9 (#234)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1323 | 1412 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1243 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 221.8 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Mercury: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: —

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 462.69 |

## Reasoning

- Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 32.9 (#63)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1284 | 1404 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 21% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 20% |
| DTBench | — | 82.9% |
| LMCA | — | 29.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.98 |

## Math

- Mercury: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 36.3 (#117)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1407 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 6.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 0% |

## Knowledge

- Mercury: —
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#84)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 82.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 20.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 10.5% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1408 |

## Multilingual

- Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.7 (#116)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1259 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1446 |
| LMArena French | — | 1412 |
| LMArena German | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1369 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1344 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1379 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1399 |

## Instruction Following

- Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.8 (#133)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1238 | 1374 |

## Long Context

- Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#119)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1264 | 1392 |

## Writing & Preference

- Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
- Qwen3.5-Flash: 58.2 (#117)

| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.5-Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1186 | 1343 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1283 | 1393 |

## FAQ

### Is Mercury better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.3 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Mercury or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 33.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.