Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Updated October 21, 2026. 22 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick Qwen3.7 Max for coding: it scores 45.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 0.0 for Mercury 2.
Pick Mercury 2 when output tokens cost 5.9x less.
- Shared results
- 22
- Mercury 2 only
- 20
- Qwen3.7 Max only
- 37
- 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
Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max scores 45.1 against 0.0.
One benchmark behind each score
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max leads, 29.5 against 10.8.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max leads, 22.5 against 1.6.
Same board, both measured
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has a GPQA Diamond result, 90.2%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has a MMLU Pro result, 89.3%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max leads, 1274 against 1036.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max takes 1M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Mercury 2
Mercury 2 $0.0006, Qwen3.7 Max $0.0037 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has the number, $4.69.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Mercury 2 0.0 from 1 benchmark, Qwen3.7 Max 45.1 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- Coding, 34.4 points apart on average over 7 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena WebDev: React: Mercury 2 1160 against Qwen3.7 Max 1514, 59.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Mercury 2 $0.75 against Qwen3.7 Max $4.425 per million output tokens, 5.9x apart.
- Context window
- Mercury 2 takes 128K tokens, Qwen3.7 Max 1M.
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 | Qwen3.7 Max | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 7 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 2 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 8 | ||
| General | 0 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 22 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index07
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1171 | 1515 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| AA Coding Index | 31.1 | 66.0 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 87.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 47.7% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 13.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SciCode | 37.7% | 49.5% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 26.5% | 50.8% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| WeirdML | 43.2% | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 785.6 | 1189.4 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1390 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1385 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1160 | 1514 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1199 | 1512 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.8 | 29.5 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 154.0 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.6 | 22.5 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1208 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 1191 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1153 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1165 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1187 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1161 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1158 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1196 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 47.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 15.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 25.5% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 70.8% | 94.7% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 90.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 77.0% | 92.3% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 17.1% | 40.5% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 90.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SimpleBench | Not measured | 70.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Chess puzzles | Not measured | 26.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Mystery game puzzles | Not measured | 32.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| EBR-bench | Not measured | 9.5% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1362 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1358 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1374 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 95.6% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | Not measured | 64.6% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | Not measured | 34.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| ProofBench | Not measured | 26.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 89.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.7% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | Not measured | 55.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1343 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1363 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1349 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1036 | 1274 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: UI components | 998 | 1269 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: game dev | 985 | 1265 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: data viz | 1009 | 1275 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: 3D | 982 | 1266 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1022 | 1275 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: SVG | 998 | 1216 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | 990 | 1211 | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| IFBench | 69.8% | 80.5% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 43.7% | 79.0% | Qwen3.7 Max |
| DTBench | Not measured | 92.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 44.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LMArena Text | 1354 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1328 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1286 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1378 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1330 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1414 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1304 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1357 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1329 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1300 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1314 | Not measured | Only Mercury 2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max | 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
Mercury 2 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Mercury 2 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Inception Mercury 2 | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Inception | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | March 4, 2026 | May 21, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.25 | $1.475 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.75 | $4.425 |
| Coding index | 0.0 | 45.1 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $4.69 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Mercury 2 better than Qwen3.7 Max for coding?
Pick Qwen3.7 Max for coding: it scores 45.1 on the Vibe Coding Index against 0.0 for Mercury 2. Pick Mercury 2 when output tokens cost 5.9x less.
Which is cheaper, Mercury 2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Mercury 2 costs $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max costs $1.475 and $4.425. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.7 Max only.
Which has the bigger context window, Mercury 2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Mercury 2 vs Qwen3.7 Max comparison based on?
22 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Mercury 2's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.7 Max's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.