Noometry

Model comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen3.7 Flash

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Qwen3.7 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

39.9

Rank #156 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.7 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.7 Flash leads 28.2 to 9.2.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper at $0.03 / $0.13 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
  • Qwen3.7 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R+Qwen3.7 Flash
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.439.9
Released2024-08-302026-07-15
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.03
Output $ / M tokens$10$0.13
Results tracked347

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
LMArena Coding1187—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Qwen3.7 Flash: 28.2 (#108)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
Epoch Capabilities Index119.34144.64
SimpleBench17.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)—43.8%
Chess Puzzles—23%
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1186—
Mystery Game Puzzles—15%
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Qwen3.7 Flash: 38.3 (#140)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—19.3%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—86.7%
LiveBench Math21.3%—
LMArena Math1188—

Knowledge Qwen3.7 Flash leads

Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Qwen3.7 Flash: 48.9 (#75)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
LMArena Expert1174—
MMLU69.4%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 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), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1197—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3.7 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1230—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Qwen3.7 Flash: —

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

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.9 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen3.7 Flash?

Qwen3.7 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.03 per million input tokens and $0.13 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.7 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen3.7 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Flash has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper