# Gemma 2 27B vs Mercury 2.5

> Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#302); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-2-27b-vs-mercury-2-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Mercury 2.5 leads 22.4 to 10.0.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.65 / $0.65 for Gemma 2 27B.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 8K.
- Gemma 2 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 29.2 | 30.2 |
| Rank | 302 | — |
| Context | 8K | 260K |
| Input $/M | $0.65 | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | $0.65 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 2 27B: 33.5 (#243)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 42.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 36% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1211 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 52.5% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 2 27B: 14.8 (#313)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 28.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1199 | — |
| DTBench | 48% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 47.9% | — |
| LMCA | 7.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 122.06 | — |
| LiveBench | 38.2% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 2 27B: 10.0 (#306)
- Mercury 2.5: 22.4

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.4% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LiveBench Math | 26.5% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1212 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 27.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 2 27B: 18.9 (#275)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 36.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 27.1% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1172 | — |
| MMLU | 75.7% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 2 27B: 38.8 (#221)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1217 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1221 | — |
| LMArena French | 1246 | — |
| LMArena German | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1175 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1234 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1228 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 2 27B: 60.7 (#244)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 58.1% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1206 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 2 27B: 37.3 (#213)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 2 27B: 44.4 (#220)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 2 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1231 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1241 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1224 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 32.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 2 27B better than Mercury 2.5?

Gemma 2 27B has enough public results to be ranked (#302); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 2 27B 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; Gemma 2 27B lists at $0.65 and $0.65.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 8K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 2 27B and Mercury 2.5 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 2 27B has 34 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 2.