Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) vs Mercury 2
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) scores higher in 2 categories and Mercury 2 in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Mercury 2 leads 23.8 to 15.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 25.8% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and 43.2% for Mercury 2.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 35.1 | 39.1 |
| Released | 2024-12-06 | 2026-02-20 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | 128K |
| Max output | — | 50K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.75 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.4 (#315), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 25.8% | 43.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1350 | 1391 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 13.5% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 38.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1171 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 59.9% | — |
| CadEval | 30% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.1 (#92), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| TheAgentCompany | 11.4% | — |
Reasoning Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#318), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1346 | 1362 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 1.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | 31.1% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 37.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| EnigmaEval | 1.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 78.2% | — |
| DTBench | 63.2% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 69.4% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.36 | — |
| LiveBench | 66.9% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 37.9 (#146), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 57.8% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 45.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 75.8% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1352 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 82.2% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1.7% | — |
Knowledge Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#213), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1339 | 1358 |
| GPQA Diamond | 64.1% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 6.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 73.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 12.4% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 55.6% | — |
| MMLU | 79.7% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.5 (#79), Mercury 2: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1158 | — |
| GeoBench | 77% | — |
Multilingual Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.4 (#149), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1342 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1373 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1351 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1391 | — |
| LMArena German | 1353 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1294 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1363 | — |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.4 (#97), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1336 | 1329 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 85.8% | — |
| IFEval | 84.1% | — |
Long Context Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#203), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1330 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | — |
Writing & Preference Mercury 2 leads
Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.5 (#190), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1354 | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1340 | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1350 | 1358 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 73.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1128 | — |
| WildBench | 80% | — |
| LiveBench Language | 51.3% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better than Mercury 2?
Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 35.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) or Mercury 2 better for coding?
Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 28.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) and Mercury 2 share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.