Model comparison
Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Mistral Nemo
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
Google
Mistral AISummary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher in 4 categories and Mistral Nemo in 1 category; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 53.8 to 28.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard: 56.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash and 27.6% for Mistral Nemo.
- Mistral Nemo is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Mistral Nemo has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Mistral AI | |
| Noometry Index | 39.3 | 26.4 |
| Released | 2025-04-17 | 2024-07-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 128K |
| Max output | 66K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.30 | $0.15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 54 | 10 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.8 (#220), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 28.7% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 55.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 41.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1424 | — |
| ALE-Bench | 661.88 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.8 (#74), Mistral Nemo: 23.5 (#125)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 56.2% | 27.6% |
| BALROG | 33.5% | 17.6% |
| Terminal-Bench | 17.1% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | 41.1% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 548.84 | — |
Reasoning Mistral Nemo leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.1 (#286), Mistral Nemo: 20.7 (#232)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 76.5% | 48.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 143.03 | 118.68 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 2.5% | — |
| SimpleBench | 41.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 56.8% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 33.3% | — |
| CritPt | 1.1% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 2.7% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1422 | — |
| LMCA | 27.5% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.6 | — |
| PIQA | — | 83.5% |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 39.9 (#98), Mistral Nemo: 25.5 (#268)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 73.1% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 38.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1415 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 10.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 84.2% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.4 (#168), Mistral Nemo: 12.3 (#298)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 29.9% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 12.1% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 63.9% | — |
| Confabulations | 16.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 39% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1426 | — |
| BoolQ | — | 82.5% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.8 (#32), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1253 | — |
| GeoBench | 76% | — |
| VPCT | 46.2% | — |
| SpatialViz-Bench | 36.9% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.3 (#88), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1409 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1450 | — |
| LMArena French | 1433 | — |
| LMArena German | 1418 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1405 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1385 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1415 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1421 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.7 (#54), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 89.8% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1405 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#17), Mistral Nemo: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 77.8% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1419 | — |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Gemini 2.5 Flash: 53.8 (#157), Mistral Nemo: 28.5 (#296)
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1137 | 881 |
| LMArena Text | 1417 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1400 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 76.5% | — |
| WildBench | 81.7% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1408 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Mistral Nemo?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.3 to 26.4 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Nemo costs 5.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Mistral Nemo?
Mistral Nemo is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 2.5 Flash and Mistral Nemo share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Nemo has 10.