Mercury 2 vs Qwen3 32B
Updated October 21, 2026. 27 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick Qwen3 32B for coding: it scores 40.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 0.0 for Mercury 2.
Pick Mercury 2 when what matters is SciCode or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 27
- Mercury 2 only
- 15
- Qwen3 32B only
- 15
- Like-for-like categories
- 6 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B scores 40.0 against 0.0.
One benchmark behind each score
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Mercury 2
Mercury 2 leads, 10.8 against 7.3.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Mercury 2 has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.6.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Mercury 2 has a Design Arena: websites result, 1036.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3 32B
Qwen3 32B takes 131K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 32B
Mercury 2 $0.0006, Qwen3 32B $0.0002 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Mercury 2 0.0 from 1 benchmark, Qwen3 32B 40.0 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 40.9 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Mercury 2 43.7% against Qwen3 32B 0.0%, 43.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Mercury 2 $0.75 against Qwen3 32B $0.28 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
- Context window
- Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Qwen3 32B 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.
| Category | Mercury 2 | Bars | Qwen3 32B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 4 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 1 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 4 | 1 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 2 | ||
| General | 11 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 22 | 5 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index40
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aider polyglot | Not measured | 40.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| AA Coding Index | 31.1 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 54.6% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| SciCode | 37.7% | 36.0% | Mercury 2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 26.5% | 3.0% | Mercury 2 |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 785.6 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1390 | 1357 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1385 | 1366 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1160 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1199 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.8 | 7.3 | Mercury 2 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 138.4 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.6 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 70.8% | 29.8% | Mercury 2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index41
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.0% | 66.8% | Mercury 2 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.1% | 7.4% | Mercury 2 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 65.7% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1362 | 1334 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1358 | 1362 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1374 | 1350 | Mercury 2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 73.0 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 73.0% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 66.9% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1399 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1420 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 79.8% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1343 | 1372 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1363 | 1368 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1324 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1349 | 1318 | Mercury 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
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1036 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 998 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 985 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1009 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 982 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1022 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: SVG | 998 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 990 | Not measured | Only 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 index112
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 69.8% | 36.3% | Mercury 2 |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 43.7% | 0.0% | Mercury 2 |
| DTBench | Not measured | 67.5% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 17.3% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 74.2% | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1340 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1328 | 1305 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1286 | 1297 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: English | 1378 | 1359 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1330 | 1317 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1414 | 1357 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1341 | Only Qwen3 32B measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1304 | 1311 | Qwen3 32B |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1357 | 1331 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1329 | 1327 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1300 | 1298 | Mercury 2 |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1314 | 1279 | Mercury 2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3 32B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 32B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 32B 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.
| Specification | Inception Mercury 2 | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Inception | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | March 4, 2026 | April 28, 2025 |
| Context window | 128K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $0.08 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.75 | $0.28 |
| Coding index | 0.0 | 40.0 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Mercury 2 better than Qwen3 32B for coding?
Pick Qwen3 32B for coding: it scores 40.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 0.0 for Mercury 2. Pick Mercury 2 when what matters is SciCode or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Qwen3 32B?
Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Qwen3 32B costs $0.08 and $0.28. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Qwen3 32B?
Qwen3 32B, with 131K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs Qwen3 32B comparison based on?
27 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3 32B's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.