Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite vs Mercury 2
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher in 2 categories and Mercury 2 in 5 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads 37.4 to 33.2.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 37.3 | 38.8 |
| 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 | 32 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.4 (#181), Mercury 2: 33.2 (#250)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | 1391 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1170 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.2% |
| LiveBench Coding | 47.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 21.2 (#203), Mercury 2: 23.0 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1324 | 1362 |
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 50.1% | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 65.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 57.1 | — |
| LiveBench | 54.3% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.8 (#192), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Omni-MATH | 37.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1309 | — |
Knowledge Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.6 (#185), Mercury 2: 35.6 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1305 | 1358 |
| MMLU-Pro | 72% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 30.6 (#103), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1100 | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.2 (#156), Mercury 2: 46.8 (#153)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1323 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1339 | 1416 |
| LMArena Russian | 1328 | 1303 |
| LMArena French | 1346 | — |
| LMArena German | 1306 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1302 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1325 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1313 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.6 (#158), Mercury 2: 70.4 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1305 | 1328 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 78.3% | — |
| IFEval | 82.4% | — |
Long Context Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#155), Mercury 2: 40.4 (#149)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1321 | 1329 |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.9 (#172), Mercury 2: 54.0 (#151)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1330 | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1307 | 1358 |
| WildBench | 79% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better than Mercury 2?
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite or Mercury 2 better for coding?
Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.4 versus 33.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite and Mercury 2 share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.