Model comparison
ERNIE 5.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 43.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.
Baidu
GoogleSummary
- They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. ERNIE 5.1 scores higher in 5 categories and Gemini 2.5 Pro in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in long context, where Gemini 2.5 Pro leads 59.8 to 44.7.
Side by side
| ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu | |
| Noometry Index | 43.8 | 45.0 |
| Released | — | 2025-03-25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 1.05M |
| Max output | — | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $10 |
| Results tracked | 19 | 78 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.0 (#76), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 42.4 (#101)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1488 | 1452 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.6% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 53.6% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 83.1% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1227 |
| SciCode | — | 42.8% |
| GSO | — | 3.9% |
| WeirdML | — | 54% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 85.9% |
| CadEval | — | 64% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.52 |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.51 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 29.2 (#88)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1227 | 1142 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 32.6% |
| GDPval | — | 23.3% |
| Remote Labor Index | — | 0.8% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 30.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 13.7% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 42.8% |
| BALROG | — | 43.3% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 55.4% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 573.64 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
ERNIE 5.1: 21.9 (#211), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 28.8 (#99)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1481 | 1455 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 4.9% |
| SimpleBench | — | 62.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 70.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 23.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 41% |
| CritPt | — | 2% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 20% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 5.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 89.8% |
| DTBench | — | 82.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 79.9% |
| LMCA | — | 34.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 145.32 |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.3 |
| LiveBench | — | 82.3% |
Math ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 40.3 (#92), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 32.5 (#213)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1481 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 24.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 84.7% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 41.6% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 90.2% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 95.9% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 14.1% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
ERNIE 5.1: 41.9 (#102), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 56.0 (#46)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1492 | 1452 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 85.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 21.6% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 86.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 10.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 74.9% |
Multimodal Not comparable
ERNIE 5.1: —, Gemini 2.5 Pro: 45.2 (#18)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1263 |
| GeoBench | — | 86% |
| VPCT | — | 48% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1421 |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 44.7% |
Multilingual Too close to call
ERNIE 5.1: 55.5 (#29), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 55.3 (#31)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1454 | 1451 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1508 | 1507 |
| LMArena French | 1488 | 1472 |
| LMArena German | 1470 | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1422 | 1461 |
| LMArena Korean | 1427 | 1434 |
| LMArena Russian | 1459 | 1461 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1473 | 1473 |
Instruction Following ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 76.7 (#37), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 75.0 (#75)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1460 | 1437 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 80.6% |
| IFEval | — | 84% |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Pro leads
ERNIE 5.1: 44.7 (#59), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 59.8 (#5)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1462 | 1449 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 91.7% |
Writing & Preference ERNIE 5.1 leads
ERNIE 5.1: 65.1 (#52), Gemini 2.5 Pro: 63.7 (#62)
| Benchmark | ERNIE 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1468 | 1458 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1441 | 1454 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1471 | 1453 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83.8% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1421 |
| WildBench | — | 85.7% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 67.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is ERNIE 5.1 better than Gemini 2.5 Pro?
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.0 to 43.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is ERNIE 5.1 or Gemini 2.5 Pro better for coding?
ERNIE 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.0 versus 42.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do ERNIE 5.1 and Gemini 2.5 Pro share?
18 benchmarks have published results for both models. ERNIE 5.1 has 19 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Pro has 78.