Model comparison
Gemma 2B vs Mercury
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 2B scores higher in 1 category and Mercury in 5 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Mercury leads 46.2 to 24.1.
- Gemma 2B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Gemma 2B | Mercury | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Inception | |
| Noometry Index | 29.1 | 37.3 |
| Released | 2024-02-21 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 23 | 9 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Mercury leads
Gemma 2B: 28.9 (#300), Mercury: 38.1 (#164)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1010 | 1323 |
| HumanEval+ | 20.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 34.1% | — |
Reasoning Gemma 2B leads
Gemma 2B: 17.9 (#275), Mercury: 16.8 (#288)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 989 | 1284 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 21.6% |
| BIG-Bench Hard | 35.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 93.57 | — |
| HellaSwag | 71.4% | — |
| PIQA | 77.3% | — |
| WinoGrande | 65.4% | — |
Math Not comparable
Gemma 2B: 27.6 (#237), Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1009 | — |
| GSM8K | 17.7% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Gemma 2B: —, Mercury: —
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | 42.1% | — |
| BoolQ | 69.4% | — |
| MMLU | 42.3% | — |
| TriviaQA | 53.2% | — |
Multilingual Mercury leads
Gemma 2B: 23.1 (#289), Mercury: 41.7 (#201)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 958 | 1259 |
| LMArena Chinese | 986 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 937 | — |
Instruction Following Mercury leads
Gemma 2B: 48.8 (#297), Mercury: 65.3 (#220)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 971 | 1238 |
Long Context Mercury leads
Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#286), Mercury: 38.3 (#193)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 981 | 1264 |
Writing & Preference Mercury leads
Gemma 2B: 24.1 (#303), Mercury: 46.2 (#216)
| Benchmark | Gemma 2B | Mercury |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1002 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 986 | 1186 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 945 | 1283 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Gemma 2B better than Mercury?
Mercury is the stronger model overall, scoring 37.3 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Gemma 2B or Mercury better for coding?
Mercury scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.1 versus 28.9 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Gemma 2B and Mercury share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2B has 23 scored results on Noometry and Mercury has 9.