Model comparison
Gemini 2.0 Pro vs Hunyuan Turbos 20250226
Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Google
TencentSummary
- The widest gap is in long context, where Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads 41.6 to 29.2.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Tencent | |
| Noometry Index | 39.1 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2025-02-05 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 14 | 16 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 37.8 (#187), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 40.0 (#152)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 35.6% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 63.5% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1361 |
Reasoning Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 22.3 (#198), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 27.8 (#113)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.7% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 60.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1374 |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 68% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 65.1% | — |
Math Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 39.7 (#100), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.5 (#154)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 71% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1359 |
| MATH Level 5 | 83.5% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#167), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 37.0 (#161)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 18.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1339 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.0 Pro: —, Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 48.9 (#136)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1363 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1417 |
| LMArena French | — | 1391 |
| LMArena German | — | 1355 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1342 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1351 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1368 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.0 Pro leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 75.5 (#59), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 71.0 (#158)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 83.4% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1344 |
Long Context Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 29.2 (#292), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 41.6 (#136)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 41.7% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1366 |
Writing & Preference Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 leads
Gemini 2.0 Pro: 52.7 (#165), Hunyuan Turbos 20250226: 57.4 (#128)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.0 Pro | Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1359 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1387 |
| LiveBench Language | 44.9% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro better than Hunyuan Turbos 20250226?
Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemini 2.0 Pro or Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 better for coding?
Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.0 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.0 Pro and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.0 Pro has 14 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan Turbos 20250226 has 16.