Model comparison
Command A vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 1 category and Gemini 3.5 Flash in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 62.8 to 18.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 10.3% for Command A and 47.1% for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper at $1.50 / $9 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Gemini 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 54.2 |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 8K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $1.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $9 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 54 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 27.2 (#322), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 49.4 (#49)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1492 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 79.3% |
| DeepSWE | — | 37.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1499 |
| SciCode | — | 53.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 62.6% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 911.02 |
Agentic & Tool Use Command A leads
Command A: 35.9 (#40), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 24.7 (#114)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 27.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 6.7% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,396 |
Reasoning Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 18.3 (#283), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 62.8 (#18)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1488 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 47.1% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 72.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 76.7% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 92.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 92.5% |
| CritPt | — | 13.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 50% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 25.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 4.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 58.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 154.46 |
| ForecastBench | — | 59 |
Math Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 36.2 (#171), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 60.7 (#36)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1504 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 62.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 26.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 76.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 37.1 (#159), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 66.3 (#11)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1495 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 66.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command A: —, Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.7 (#15)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1310 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.6% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1463 |
Multilingual Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 45.3 (#170), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 57.0 (#13)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1476 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1526 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | 1490 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1492 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | 1486 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1451 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1493 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | 1480 |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 69.1 (#177), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 77.0 (#30)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1467 |
Long Context Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 40.6 (#151), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.4 (#38)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1482 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command A: 47.6 (#208), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 65.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Command A | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1482 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1470 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1087 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A better than Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Command A or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $9 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.
Is Command A or Gemini 3.5 Flash better for coding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.4 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Command A and Gemini 3.5 Flash share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.5 Flash has 54.