Model comparison

Command R+ vs Mercury 2.5

Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Mercury 2.5 Inception

33.5

Rank #242 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Mercury 2.5 leads 22.4 to 9.2.
  • Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
  • Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R+ and Mercury 2.5 specifications
Command R+Mercury 2.5
ProviderCohereInception
Noometry Index32.433.5
Released2024-08-302026-09-08
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K260K
Max output4K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.04
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.15
Results tracked344

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Mercury 2.5 leads

Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
SciCode—38.5%
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
LMArena Coding1187—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
ALE-Bench—301.65
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning Mercury 2.5 leads

Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
SimpleBench17.4%—
CritPt—0%
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1186—
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.34—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Command R+ leads

Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
ProofBench—3%
LiveBench Math21.3%—
LMArena Math1188—

Knowledge Not comparable

Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Mercury 2.5: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
LMArena Expert1174—
MMLU69.4%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Mercury 2.5: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
LMArena Non-English1216—
LMArena Chinese1226—
LMArena French1209—
LMArena German1216—
LMArena Japanese1166—
LMArena Korean1138—
LMArena Russian1227—
LMArena Spanish1189—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Command R+: 60.0 (#254), Mercury 2.5: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1197—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Mercury 2.5: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
LMArena Longer Query1230—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Mercury 2.5: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Mercury 2.5
LMArena Text1229—
LMArena Creative Writing1235—
LMArena Multi-Turn1213—
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command R+ or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?

Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Mercury 2.5 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.

Related comparisons

Go deeper