Model comparison
Mercury vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Mercury scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 54.4 to 17.5.
Side by side
| Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 37.6 | 56.8 |
| Released | — | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1M |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $6 |
| Results tracked | 9 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 38.7 (#170), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1502 |
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| SciCode | — | 53.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 17.5 (#293), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1285 | 1496 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 21.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
| DTBench | — | 92% |
| LMCA | — | 46.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 156.41 |
Math Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1499 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1507 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Mercury: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 41.6 (#206), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1538 |
| LMArena French | — | 1503 |
| LMArena German | — | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1492 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 65.2 (#224), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | 1479 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 38.4 (#198), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1266 | 1489 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads
Mercury: 46.2 (#221), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | Mercury | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1282 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1191 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1282 | 1489 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Mercury better than Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.
Is Mercury or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 38.7 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Mercury and Qwen3.8 Max share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Mercury has 9 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.