Model comparison

Command A vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified October 10, 2026. 21 shared benchmarks.

Command A

Cohere

36.5

Rank #215 Confirmed

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) xAI

48.6

Rank #54 Confirmed

Summary

They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 1 category and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 18.3.
The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 28.8% for Command A and 75% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command A and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) specifications
	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Provider	Cohere	xAI
Noometry Index	36.5	48.6
Released	2025-03-13	2026-02-17
Weights	Open	Proprietary
Context window	256K	1M
Max output	8K	30K
Input $ / M tokens	$2.50	$1.25
Output $ / M tokens	$10	$2.50
Results tracked	24	46

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

Category by category

Coding Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 27.2 (#322), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

Coding benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Coding	1330	1459
Aider Polyglot	12%	—
LMArena WebDev	—	1375
WeirdML	—	52.3%
ALE-Bench	—	1,150

Agentic & Tool Use Command A leads

Command A: 35.9 (#40), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Terminal-Bench	—	57.3%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard	57.1%	—
τ²-bench Banking	—	18%
LMArena Search	—	1189
Vending-Bench 2	—	4,663

Reasoning Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 18.3 (#283), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

Reasoning benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
Kagi LLM Benchmark	28.8%	75%
LMArena Hard Prompts	1326	1451
DTBench	61.3%	90.1%
LMCA	10.3%	38.7%
ARC-AGI-2	—	65.1%
NYT Connections (extended)	—	85.4%
ARC-AGI-1	—	89.5%
Chess Puzzles	—	24%
Thematic Generalization	—	63.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index	—	151.98
ForecastBench	—	61.4

Math Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 36.2 (#171), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

Math benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Math	1300	1455
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)	—	44.9%
FrontierMath Tier 4	—	17.1%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025	—	92.2%
ProofBench	—	14%

Knowledge Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 37.1 (#159), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

Knowledge benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Expert	1295	1439
GPQA Diamond	—	89.3%
SimpleQA Verified	—	30.2%
Vectara Hallucination Rate	9.3%	—

Multimodal Not comparable

Command A: —, Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

Multimodal benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Vision	—	1263
Blueprint-Bench 2	—	0%
LMArena Document	—	1416

Multilingual Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 45.3 (#170), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

Multilingual benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Non-English	1313	1441
LMArena Chinese	1327	1481
LMArena French	1351	1476
LMArena German	1341	1465
LMArena Japanese	1285	1449
LMArena Korean	1285	1417
LMArena Russian	1314	1458
LMArena Spanish	1347	1443

Instruction Following Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 69.1 (#177), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

Instruction Following benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Instruction Following	1309	1420

Long Context Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 40.6 (#151), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

Long Context benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Longer Query	1334	1437
CL-bench	—	22.2%
CL-bench Life	—	11.9%

Writing & Preference Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads

Command A: 47.6 (#208), Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
Benchmark	Command A	Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)
LMArena Text	1331	1451
LMArena Creative Writing	1319	1438
EQ-Bench Creative Writing	1145	1574
LMArena Multi-Turn	1339	1456

Frequently asked questions

Is Command A better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command A or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command A or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 256K.

How many benchmarks do Command A and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.