Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Command A

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index. Command A costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 22 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

Command A Cohere

36.5

Rank #215 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and Command A in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 18.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 83.6% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 28.8% for Command A.
  • Command A is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • Claude Opus 4.6 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
  • Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6Command A
ProviderAnthropicCohere
Noometry Index58.236.5
Released2026-02-042025-03-13
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M256K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2.50
Output $ / M tokens$25$10
Results tracked6824

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), Command A: 27.2 (#322)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Coding15361330
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%—
Aider Polyglot—12%
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
WeirdML78%—
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), Command A: 35.9 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—57.1%
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), Command A: 18.3 (#283)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%28.8%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271326
DTBench91.2%61.3%
LMCA55.8%10.3%
ARC-AGI-269.2%—
SimpleBench67.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
ARC-AGI-194%—
Chess Puzzles17%—
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24—
ForecastBench60—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), Command A: 36.2 (#171)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Math15191300
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%—
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%—
ProofBench50%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), Command A: 37.1 (#159)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%9.3%
LMArena Expert15461295
GPQA Diamond90.5%—
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
SimpleQA Verified47%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), Command A: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Vision1316—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), Command A: 45.3 (#170)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Non-English14891313
LMArena Chinese15511327
LMArena French15131351
LMArena German15021341
LMArena Japanese14841285
LMArena Korean14641285
LMArena Russian14971314
LMArena Spanish15101347

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), Command A: 69.1 (#177)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Instruction Following15231309

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), Command A: 40.6 (#151)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Longer Query15201334
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), Command A: 47.6 (#208)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Command A
LMArena Text15031331
LMArena Creative Writing15051319
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18091145
LMArena Multi-Turn15131339
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than Command A?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index. Command A costs 2.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or Command A?

Command A is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or Command A better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.6 does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and Command A share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and Command A has 24.

Related comparisons

Go deeper