Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Mercury 2 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Mercury 2 leads Llama 3.3 70B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 10.8 to 7.7, at about the same output price ($0.75 vs $0.72 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 28 benchmarks have a result for both.

Mercury 2Inception
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.75
28
Llama 3.3 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
26.0
Output $/M
$0.72
0
vs boards won of 28 shared

Mercury 2 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
28
Mercury 2 only
14
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct only
24
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Mercury 2 not benchmarked, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 44.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
τ²-Bench Telecom: Mercury 2 70.8% against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 26.6%, 44.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Mercury 2 $0.75 against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.72 per million output tokens, 1.0x apart.
Context window
Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryMercury 2BarsLlama 3.3 70B InstructTies
Coding50
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning50
Knowledge30
General130
All shared boards280
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index50
Coding benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
LMArena WebDev1171Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
AA Coding Index31.111.9Mercury 2
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured28.8%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SciCode37.7%Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)26.5%3.0%Mercury 2
WeirdML43.2%14.4%Mercury 2
ALE-Bench785.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena Text: coding13901268Mercury 2
LMArena Text: software and IT13851273Mercury 2
LMArena WebDev: React1160Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1199Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index10.87.7Mercury 2
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured127.3Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index1.6Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom70.8%26.6%Mercury 2
BALROGNot measured23.0%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured31.9%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)77.0%49.8%Mercury 2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)17.1%3.6%Mercury 2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured47.4%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SimpleBenchNot measured19.9%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13621257Mercury 2
LMArena Text: expert13581225Mercury 2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13741277Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured7.7Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured7.7%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured5.1%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured41.6%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1267Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1267Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Knowledge benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured86.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science13431284Mercury 2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13631275Mercury 2
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1284Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and finance13491243Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
Design Arena: websites1036Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: UI components998Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: game dev985Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: data viz1009Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: 3D983Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1022Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: SVG998Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art988Not measuredOnly Mercury 2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index130
General benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
IFBench69.8%47.1%Mercury 2
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)43.7%15.7%Mercury 2
DTBenchNot measured59.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured17.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured33.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text13541274Mercury 2
LMArena Text: instruction following13281242Mercury 2
LMArena Text: creative writing12861250Mercury 2
LMArena Text: English13781303Mercury 2
LMArena Text: non-English13301236Mercury 2
LMArena Text: Chinese14141217Mercury 2
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1251Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1150Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1142Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1282Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1269Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian13041252Mercury 2
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1259Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13571280Mercury 2
LMArena Text: longer queries13291255Mercury 2
LMArena Text: writing and language13001255Mercury 2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13141241Mercury 2
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkMercury 2Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Mercury 2$0.0006Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.015Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.025Fits in one request

Mercury 2 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Mercury 2$0.058Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.097Exceeds the context window

Mercury 2 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Mercury 2 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
SpecificationInception Mercury 2Meta Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MakerInceptionMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 4, 2026December 6, 2024
Context window128K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.25$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.75$0.72
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Mercury 2 better than Llama 3.3 70B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct costs $0.45 and $0.72. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct comparison based on?

28 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next