Noometry

Model comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 4 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #182 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 4 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 29.0 to 9.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 5% for Command R+ and 31% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper at $0.19 / $1.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R+Qwen3.6 Flash
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.438.8
Released2024-08-302026-04-27
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K66K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$10$1.13
Results tracked3413

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
LMArena Coding1187—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
ALE-Bench—326.4
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
SimpleBench17.4%35.2%
DTBench54.9%77.1%
LMCA5%31%
Epoch Capabilities Index119.34143.26
Chess Puzzles—20%
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1186—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
LiveBench Math21.3%—
LMArena Math1188—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
LMArena Expert1174—
MMLU69.4%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
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), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1197—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1230—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1229—
LMArena Creative Writing1235—
LMArena Multi-Turn1213—
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.19 per million input tokens and $1.13 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

4 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper