# Gemma 3 4B vs Mercury 2.5

> Gemma 3 4B has enough public results to be ranked (#320); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gemma-3-4b-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 15.8.
- Gemma 3 4B is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $0.04 / $0.15 for Mercury 2.5.
- Mercury 2.5 accepts more context: 260K tokens versus 131K.
- Gemma 3 4B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Google | Inception |
| Noometry Index | 27.9 | 30.2 |
| Rank | 320 | — |
| Context | 131K | 260K |
| Input $/M | $0.04 | $0.04 |
| Output $/M | $0.08 | $0.15 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Gemma 3 4B: 35.3 (#214)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1230 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 301.65 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Gemma 3 4B: 20.7 (#134)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 19.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Gemma 3 4B: 12.7 (#330)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 25.2% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1253 | — |
| DTBench | 50.9% | — |
| LMCA | 2.8% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.02 | — |

## Math

- Gemma 3 4B: 15.8 (#286)
- Mercury 2.5: 22.4

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 7.5% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 3% |
| LMArena Math | 1239 | — |

## Knowledge

- Gemma 3 4B: 11.8 (#294)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.4% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1223 | — |

## Multilingual

- Gemma 3 4B: 42.7 (#189)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1273 | — |
| LMArena German | 1281 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1294 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Gemma 3 4B: 65.4 (#219)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1239 | — |

## Long Context

- Gemma 3 4B: 38.6 (#189)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1274 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Gemma 3 4B: 42.2 (#234)
- Mercury 2.5: —

| Benchmark | Gemma 3 4B | Mercury 2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1291 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1270 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1068 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1255 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Gemma 3 4B better than Mercury 2.5?

Gemma 3 4B has enough public results to be ranked (#320); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

### Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 4B or Mercury 2.5?

Gemma 3 4B is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Mercury 2.5 lists at $0.04 and $0.15.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

### How many benchmarks do Gemma 3 4B and Mercury 2.5 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Gemma 3 4B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Mercury 2.5 has 2.