Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Mercury

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Mercury Inception

37.6

Rank #199 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 6 categories and Mercury in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 64.7 to 17.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 88.8% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 21.6% for Mercury.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8Mercury
ProviderAnthropicInception
Noometry Index60.737.6
Released2026-05-28—
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$5—
Output $ / M tokens$25—
Results tracked659

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Mercury: 38.7 (#170)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Coding14901322
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—
WeirdML82.9%—
ALE-Bench1,564—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Mercury: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Mercury: 17.5 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%21.6%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821285
ARC-AGI-272.1%—
SimpleBench64.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
ARC-AGI-192.5%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles34%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
DTBench94.9%—
LMCA57.5%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21—
ForecastBench59.9—

Math Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Mercury: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
ProofBench69%—
LMArena Math1487—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Mercury: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified53%—
LMArena Expert1502—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Mercury: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Vision1294—
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Mercury: 41.6 (#206)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Non-English14501260
LMArena Chinese1507—
LMArena French1481—
LMArena German1472—
LMArena Japanese1440—
LMArena Korean1432—
LMArena Russian1474—
LMArena Spanish1466—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Mercury: 65.2 (#224)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Instruction Following14761239

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Mercury: 38.4 (#198)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Longer Query14831266

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Mercury: 46.2 (#221)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Mercury
LMArena Text14611282
LMArena Creative Writing14541191
LMArena Multi-Turn14761282
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Mercury?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Mercury better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Mercury share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.

Related comparisons

Go deeper