# Gemma 3 27B vs Mercury 2.5

> Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-27b-vs-mercury-2-5
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Gemma 3 27B scores higher in 1 category and Mercury 2.5 in 2 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Mercury 2.5 leads 39.5 to 22.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 21.2% for Gemma 3 27B and 38.5% for Mercury 2.5.
- Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $0.08 / $0.16 for Gemma 3 27B.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 27B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 30.8 | 33.5 |
| Rank | 284 | 242 |
| Context | 131K | 260K |
| Input $/M | $0.08 | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | $0.16 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 27B: 22.5 (#334)
- Mercury 2.5: 39.5 (#156)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 21.2% | 38.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | 4.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 39.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1322 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.1 (#110)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 29.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 27B: 16.7 (#301)
- Mercury 2.5: 22.4 (#193)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 43.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1340 | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 51.5% | — |
| LMCA | 12.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 130.04 | — |
| LiveBench | 50% | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.9 (#265)
- Mercury 2.5: 23.3 (#272)

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 22.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LiveBench Math | 55.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1312 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 74% | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 27B: 25.5 (#261)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 47.7% | — |
| Confabulations | 40.3% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 7.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1304 | — |

## Multimodal

- Gemma 3 27B: 32.6 (#100)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1164 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 27B: 46.9 (#155)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1334 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1346 | — |
| LMArena French | 1368 | — |
| LMArena German | 1362 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1287 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1308 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1349 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1349 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 27B: 70.6 (#160)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 74.9% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1321 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 27B: 27.6 (#293)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 33.3% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1333 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 27B: 52.5 (#168)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 27B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1358 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1346 | — |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 79.9% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1266 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1345 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 34.6% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 27B better than Mercury 2.5?

Mercury 2.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.5 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 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 3 27B lists at $0.08 and $0.16.

### Is Gemma 3 27B or Mercury 2.5 better for coding?

Mercury 2.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.5 versus 22.5 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Mercury 2.5 does, with 260K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 27B and Mercury 2.5 share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 27B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 4.