Noometry

Model comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.4

Rank #257 Confirmed

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.2

Rank #95 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads 29.3 to 9.2.
  • Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
  • Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B accepts more context: 131K tokens versus 128K.

Side by side

Command R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.443.2
Released2024-08-302025-04
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K131K
Max output4K33K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$10$2.80
Results tracked3418

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 29.1 (#309), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 42.4 (#100)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Coding11871439
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 9.2 (#344), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 29.3 (#92)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Hard Prompts11861428
SimpleBench17.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.34—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 28.9 (#242), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 39.0 (#118)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Math11881426
LiveBench Math21.3%—

Knowledge Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 36.4 (#169), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 40.3 (#121)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Expert11741442
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
MMLU69.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Command R+: —, Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 39.8 (#55)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Vision—1247

Multilingual Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 38.6 (#227), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 51.9 (#97)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English12161405
LMArena Chinese12261463
LMArena French12091452
LMArena German12161424
LMArena Japanese11661385
LMArena Korean11381394
LMArena Russian12271408
LMArena Spanish11891428

Instruction Following Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 60.0 (#254), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 74.2 (#101)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Instruction Following11971406
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—

Long Context Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 37.3 (#219), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 43.4 (#98)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Longer Query12301420

Writing & Preference Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B leads

Command R+: 43.5 (#228), Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B: 60.2 (#99)

BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B
LMArena Text12291420
LMArena Creative Writing12351366
LMArena Multi-Turn12131428
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B?

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B?

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command R+ or Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B better for coding?

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.4 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B does, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-VL 235B-A22B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper