Model comparison
Command R+ vs Qwen-7B
Command R+ has enough public results to be ranked (#251); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both.
Side by side
| Command R+ | Qwen-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.0 | — |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2023-09-28 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 8 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Command R+: 28.6 (#304), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |
Reasoning Not comparable
Command R+: 8.9 (#341), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.28 | 106.47 |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | — |
| DTBench | 54.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| LMCA | 5% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 45% |
| LAMBADA | — | 67.9% |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |
| PIQA | — | 77.9% |
Math Not comparable
Command R+: 26.6 (#239), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1188 | — |
| GSM8K | — | 51.7% |
Knowledge Not comparable
Command R+: 35.9 (#165), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| MMLU | 69.4% | 45% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 75.3% |
| BoolQ | — | 76.4% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Command R+: 38.8 (#222), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | — |
| LMArena French | 1208 | — |
| LMArena German | 1216 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Command R+: 60.2 (#249), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Command R+: 37.3 (#214), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Command R+: 43.7 (#223), Qwen-7B: —
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R+ better than Qwen-7B?
Command R+ has enough public results to be ranked (#251); Qwen-7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen-7B share?
2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-7B has 8.