Noometry

Model comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct

Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

29.9

Rank #302 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct leads 20.7 to 9.2.
  • Both cost about the same: $2.50 input and $10 output per million tokens.
  • Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Command R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.429.9
Released2024-08-302024-09
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K131K
Max output4K8K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$2.80
Output $ / M tokens$10$8.40
Results tracked346

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
LMArena Coding1187—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Command R+: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 18.6 (#144)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
OSWorld—5%

Reasoning Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct leads

Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 20.7 (#233)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
SimpleBench17.4%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—36%
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1186—
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.34—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Not comparable

Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LiveBench Math21.3%—
LMArena Math1188—

Knowledge Not comparable

Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
LMArena Expert1174—
MMLU69.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Command R+: —, Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: 33.5 (#97)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Vision—1107
Video-MME—73.5%
GeoBench—62%
SpatialViz-Bench—33.3%

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1216—
LMArena Chinese1226—
LMArena French1209—
LMArena German1216—
LMArena Japanese1166—
LMArena Korean1138—
LMArena Russian1227—
LMArena Spanish1189—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Command R+: 60.0 (#254), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1197—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1230—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct
LMArena Text1229—
LMArena Creative Writing1235—
LMArena Multi-Turn1213—
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 29.9 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $2.80 per million input tokens and $8.40 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-VL 72B Instruct has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper