Model comparison
Mercury 2.5 vs Qwen3-4B
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3-4B leads 29.7 to 23.3.
- Qwen3-4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3-4B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 33.5 | 31.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-08 | 2025-04-29 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 260K | — |
| Max output | 66K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.04 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Results tracked | 4 | 6 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156), Qwen3-4B: —
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen3-4B: 27.6 (#100)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 35.7% |
Reasoning Mercury 2.5 leads
Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193), Qwen3-4B: 19.2 (#268)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 4% |
Math Qwen3-4B leads
Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272), Qwen3-4B: 29.7 (#240)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 38.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 52.2% |
| ProofBench | 3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury 2.5: —, Qwen3-4B: 33.0 (#208)
| Benchmark | Mercury 2.5 | Qwen3-4B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 52.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury 2.5 better than Qwen3-4B?
Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 31.9 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Qwen3-4B share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 4 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-4B has 6.