Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) vs Mercury 2.5

Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) vs Mercury 2.5. A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

GoogleGemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)Not ranked · benchmark data missing
Intelligence
6.50
Total cost
-
InceptionMercury 2.5Off the frontier
Intelligence
12.30
Total cost
$218
Verdict

Comparison incomplete

A reliable intelligence-versus-cost verdict requires both models' intelligence scores and benchmark-run costs. Missing data is not a performance verdict.

MetricGemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)Mercury 2.5Difference
Intelligence (higher is better)6.512.3+89.2% Mercury 2.5 is 89.2% more intelligent
Total AA cost (lower is better)Not reported$218.11— not comparable
End-to-end time (lower is better)Not reported4.32s— not comparable
Price per 1M tokens (in / out)—$0.25 / $0.75
Input modalitiesText, Image, Speech, VideoText
Open this matchup in the interactive pickerGemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning): what beats itMercury 2.5: what beats it
Matchup

Compare something else

Agents: Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e2b-non-reasoning/mercury-2-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemma-4-e2b-non-reasoning/mercury-2-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill