Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Mercury 2
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Mercury 2 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Mercury 2 leads 40.5 to 29.2.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | 2026-02-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 50K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.75 |
| Results tracked | 14 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1171 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1391 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1362 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1358 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1304 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1329 |
Long Context Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1330 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1358 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Mercury 2?
Gemini 2.0 Pro and Mercury 2 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (39.1 vs 39.1), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Mercury 2 better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.8 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Mercury 2 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.