# Command R vs Mercury 2.5

> Command R has enough public results to be ranked (#267); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-vs-mercury-2-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Command R leads 25.8 to 22.4.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for Command R.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 30.2 |
| Rank | 267 | — |
| Context | 128K | 260K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command R: 28.8 (#301)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.3 (#329)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 25.8 (#244)
- Mercury 2.5: 22.4

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1155 | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 30.5 (#219)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | — |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.9 (#240)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | — |
| LMArena French | 1161 | — |
| LMArena German | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.3 (#256)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#226)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.4 (#248)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Mercury 2.5?

Command R has enough public results to be ranked (#267); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Which is cheaper, Command R 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; Command R lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Mercury 2.5 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 2.