Model comparison
Gemma 2 27B vs Mercury
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2 27B scores higher in 0 categories and Mercury in 6 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Mercury leads 65.2 to 60.5.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2 27B | Mercury | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 29.4 | 37.6 |
| Released | 2024-06-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 8K | — |
| Max output | 2K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.65 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 34.1 (#246), Mercury: 38.7 (#170)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | 1322 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
Reasoning Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 15.3 (#315), Mercury: 17.5 (#293)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1198 | 1285 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 21.6% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.08 | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 10.7 (#311), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2 27B: 19.0 (#280), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |
Multilingual Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 38.6 (#226), Mercury: 41.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | 1260 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | — |
| LMArena French | 1247 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |
Instruction Following Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 60.5 (#249), Mercury: 65.2 (#224)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | 1239 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
Long Context Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#218), Mercury: 38.4 (#198)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1266 |
Writing & Preference Mercury leads
Gemma 2 27B: 44.2 (#225), Mercury: 46.2 (#221)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | 1191 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | 1282 |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2 27B better than Mercury?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.6 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2 27B or Mercury better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.7 versus 34.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Mercury share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.