Model comparison
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Mercury 2.5
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview scores higher in 1 category and Mercury 2.5 in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads 61.8 to 22.4.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 26% for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and 3% for Mercury 2.5.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $12 for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview.
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 260K.
Side by side
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 56.7 | 30.2 |
| Released | 2026-02-19 | 2026-09-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 260K |
| Max output | 66K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.04 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $12 | $0.15 |
| Results tracked | 71 | 2 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 42.7 (#88), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | 1,161 | 301.65 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.6% | — |
| DeepSWE | 11.7% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1446 | — |
| SciCode | 58.9% | — |
| GSO | 22.6% | — |
| WeirdML | 72.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1483 | — |
| MirrorCode | 8.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.02 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 37.7 (#33), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 80.2% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 35.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 26% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 47.8% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 22% | — |
| BALROG | 57% | — |
| ExploitBench | 26.1% | — |
| GBAEval | 0.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 17% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1211 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 77% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,774 | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.7 (#9), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 77.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 79.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 97.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98% | — |
| CritPt | 17.7% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 55% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 36.8% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 79.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 14.3% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1484 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 34% | — |
| DTBench | 97.1% | — |
| LMCA | 53.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.92 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59 | — |
Math Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview leads
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 61.8 (#28), Mercury 2.5: 22.4
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 26% | 3% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 59.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 26.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 86.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 95.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1485 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 36.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 16.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 71.8 (#3), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 94.4% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1484 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 38.1 (#60), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1296 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 26.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 26.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1444 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 57.1 (#11), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1475 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1528 | — |
| LMArena French | 1488 | — |
| LMArena German | 1491 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1494 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1458 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1496 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1480 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 77.1 (#31), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1465 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 47.3 (#17), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CL-bench | 20.8% | — |
| CL-bench Life | 16.9% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1482 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: 66.3 (#36), Mercury 2.5: —
| Benchmark | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1480 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1482 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1491 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1142 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1486 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview better than Mercury 2.5?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has enough public results to be ranked (#20); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview or Mercury 2.5?
Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview lists at $2 and $12.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview does, with 1.05M tokens against 260K.
How many benchmarks do Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview and Mercury 2.5 share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has 71 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 2.