Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
TencentSummary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 leads 39.5 to 29.1.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Tencent | |
| Noometry Index | 38.6 | 37.2 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.4 (#182), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 36.5 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1270 |
Reasoning Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 21.6 (#194), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 23.9 (#157)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1264 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.1 (#101), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 33.0 (#179)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1274 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#156), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 33.6 (#192)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1248 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 41.9 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1262 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1319 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1258 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.6 (#57), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 65.8 (#214)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1245 |
Long Context Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.1 (#287), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 39.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1301 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#164), Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10: 47.4 (#209)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1274 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1242 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1275 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10?
Gemini 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 37.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 better for coding?
They score almost the same on coding (37.4 vs 36.5); test both on your own repository before choosing.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Standard 2025 02 10 has 12.