Noometry

Model comparison

Gemma 4 31B IT vs Mercury 2

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Gemma 4 31B IT Google

43.5

Rank #90 Confirmed

Mercury 2 Inception

39.1

Rank #175 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher in 7 categories and Mercury 2 in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in coding, where Gemma 4 31B IT leads 42.3 to 33.5.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 52.3% for Gemma 4 31B IT and 43.2% for Mercury 2.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper at $0.09 / $0.34 per million input/output tokens, against $0.25 / $0.75 for Mercury 2.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.
  • Gemma 4 31B IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Gemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
ProviderGoogleInception
Noometry Index43.539.1
Released2026-04-022026-02-20
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window262K128K
Max output33K50K
Input $ / M tokens$0.09$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.34$0.75
Results tracked3517

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 42.3 (#108), Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena WebDev13661171
SciCode43.4%38.7%
WeirdML52.3%43.2%
LMArena Coding14591391
ALE-Bench925.5785.58

Reasoning Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 27.2 (#122), Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
CritPt1.4%0.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts14481362
Kagi LLM Benchmark63.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)70.6%—
Chess Puzzles5%—
Thematic Generalization53%—
DTBench82.7%—
LMCA39.3%—
Surface Evolver Bench30.6%—
Epoch Capabilities Index142.74—

Math Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 43.2 (#81), Mercury 2: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202573.3%—
LMArena Math1465—

Knowledge Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 37.9 (#151), Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
Vectara Hallucination Rate7.4%12.3%
LMArena Expert14651358
GPQA Diamond75.8%—
SimpleQA Verified10.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Gemma 4 31B IT: 41.6 (#34), Mercury 2: —

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena Vision1277—
LMArena Document1425—

Multilingual Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 53.8 (#57), Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena Non-English14311331
LMArena Chinese14761417
LMArena Russian14601304
LMArena French1435—
LMArena Spanish1444—

Instruction Following Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 75.5 (#61), Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena Instruction Following14331329

Long Context Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 44.2 (#71), Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena Longer Query14461330

Writing & Preference Gemma 4 31B IT leads

Gemma 4 31B IT: 60.5 (#96), Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)

BenchmarkGemma 4 31B ITMercury 2
LMArena Text14431355
LMArena Creative Writing14151289
LMArena Multi-Turn14521358
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1368—
EQ-Bench 41120—

Frequently asked questions

Is Gemma 4 31B IT better than Mercury 2?

Gemma 4 31B IT is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.5 to 39.1 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 4 31B IT or Mercury 2?

Gemma 4 31B IT is cheaper. It lists at $0.09 per million input tokens and $0.34 per million output tokens; Mercury 2 lists at $0.25 and $0.75.

Is Gemma 4 31B IT or Mercury 2 better for coding?

Gemma 4 31B IT scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.3 versus 33.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemma 4 31B IT does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Gemma 4 31B IT and Mercury 2 share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 4 31B IT has 35 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper