Model comparison
Command A vs Qwen3.7 Plus
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.7 Plus in 8 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Plus leads 39.3 to 18.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 10.3% for Command A and 37.6% for Qwen3.7 Plus.
- Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Qwen3.7 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 45.3 |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | 2026-06-02 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1M |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 32 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 27.2 (#322), Qwen3.7 Plus: 36.6 (#206)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1473 |
| FrontierCode | — | 10.2% |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| SciCode | — | 45.5% |
Agentic & Tool Use Command A leads
Command A: 35.9 (#40), Qwen3.7 Plus: 21.4 (#138)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 2.8% |
Reasoning Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 18.3 (#283), Qwen3.7 Plus: 39.3 (#59)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1460 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 84% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 37.6% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 74.8% |
| CritPt | — | 9.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.37 |
Math Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 36.2 (#171), Qwen3.7 Plus: 50.5 (#56)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1466 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 34.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 37.1 (#159), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1467 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 87.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command A: —, Qwen3.7 Plus: 41.8 (#33)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1279 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 45.3 (#170), Qwen3.7 Plus: 54.8 (#38)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1445 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1510 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | 1473 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1471 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | 1413 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1415 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1457 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | 1457 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 69.1 (#177), Qwen3.7 Plus: 75.8 (#52)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1440 |
Long Context Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 40.6 (#151), Qwen3.7 Plus: 44.5 (#65)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1455 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.7 Plus leads
Command A: 47.6 (#208), Qwen3.7 Plus: 64.3 (#56)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.7 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1455 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1439 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1460 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A better than Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 45.3 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Command A or Qwen3.7 Plus?
Qwen3.7 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.
Is Command A or Qwen3.7 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.7 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 36.6 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Command A and Qwen3.7 Plus share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Plus has 32.