Model comparison
Command R+ vs Qwen1.5-14B
Command R+ and Qwen1.5-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.4 vs 32.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen1.5-14B leads 21.4 to 9.2.
Side by side
| Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 32.7 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Results tracked | 34 | 17 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-14B leads
Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.1 (#263)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1138 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-14B leads
Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Qwen1.5-14B: 21.4 (#223)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1113 |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| DTBench | 54.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| LMCA | 5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.34 | — |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |
Math Qwen1.5-14B leads
Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.4 (#215)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1125 |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |
Knowledge Command R+ leads
Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.8 (#232)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1094 |
| MMLU | 69.4% | 68.6% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
Multilingual Command R+ leads
Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.7 (#262)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1095 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1147 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | 1116 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1043 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | 1019 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1046 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1085 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | — |
Instruction Following Command R+ leads
Command R+: 60.0 (#254), Qwen1.5-14B: 56.8 (#271)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1102 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |
Long Context Command R+ leads
Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#257)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 1113 |
Writing & Preference Command R+ leads
Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.6 (#276)
| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5-14B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1128 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1091 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1110 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R+ better than Qwen1.5-14B?
Command R+ and Qwen1.5-14B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (32.4 vs 32.7), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Command R+ or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-14B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 33.1 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen1.5-14B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.