# Command A vs Mercury 2

> Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-mercury-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 2 categories and Mercury 2 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury 2 leads 33.5 to 27.2.
- Mercury 2 is cheaper at $0.25 / $0.75 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Command A accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 128K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 39.1 |
| Rank | 215 | 175 |
| Context | 256K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.25 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.75 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command A: 27.2 (#322)
- Mercury 2: 33.5 (#255)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1391 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1171 |
| SciCode | — | 38.7% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 785.58 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.9 (#40)
- Mercury 2: —

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 18.3 (#283)
- Mercury 2: 23.8 (#170)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1362 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| CritPt | — | 0.8% |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |

## Math

- Command A: 36.2 (#171)
- Mercury 2: —

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | — |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 37.1 (#159)
- Mercury 2: 36.2 (#172)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | 12.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1358 |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.3 (#170)
- Mercury 2: 46.6 (#157)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1331 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1304 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | — |
| LMArena German | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.1 (#177)
- Mercury 2: 70.2 (#165)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1329 |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#151)
- Mercury 2: 40.5 (#154)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1330 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.6 (#208)
- Mercury 2: 53.8 (#155)

| Benchmark | Command A | Mercury 2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1355 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1289 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1358 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.1 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command A or Mercury 2?

Mercury 2 is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command A or Mercury 2 better for coding?

Mercury 2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.5 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Command A does, with 256K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and Mercury 2 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2 has 17.