Model comparison
Command R vs Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
GoogleSummary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where Gemini 2.5 Flash leads 75.9 to 58.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 76.5% for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $2.50 for Gemini 2.5 Flash.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 39.0 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2025-04-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 4K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 54 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 28.8 (#301), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 35.5 (#210)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | 1424 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 28.7% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 55.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 41.9% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 661.88 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R: —, Gemini 2.5 Flash: 30.6 (#67)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 17.1% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 56.2% |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 41.1% |
| BALROG | — | 33.5% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 548.84 |
Reasoning Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 13.3 (#329), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 18.2 (#271)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1422 |
| DTBench | 46.4% | 76.5% |
| LMCA | 9.2% | 27.5% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 2.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 41.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 56.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 33.3% |
| CritPt | — | 1.1% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 2.7% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 143.04 |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.6 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 25.8 (#244), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 38.1 (#87)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1415 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 73.1% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 38.5% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 4.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 30.5 (#219), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 36.1 (#162)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1426 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 12.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 63.9% |
| Confabulations | — | 16.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 7.8% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 39% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command R: —, Gemini 2.5 Flash: 41.2 (#31)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1254 |
| GeoBench | — | 76% |
| VPCT | — | 46.2% |
| SpatialViz-Bench | — | 36.9% |
Multilingual Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 35.9 (#240), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 52.5 (#83)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1410 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1450 |
| LMArena French | 1161 | 1433 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1419 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1403 |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | 1385 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1415 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | 1421 |
Instruction Following Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 58.3 (#256), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 75.9 (#50)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1405 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
| IFEval | — | 89.8% |
Long Context Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 36.3 (#226), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 47.5 (#16)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1419 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 77.8% |
Writing & Preference Gemini 2.5 Flash leads
Command R: 38.4 (#248), Gemini 2.5 Flash: 54.0 (#153)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 2.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1400 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1408 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 76.5% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1137 |
| WildBench | — | 81.7% |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Gemini 2.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.0 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 3.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 2.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or Gemini 2.5 Flash?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash lists at $0.30 and $2.50.
Is Command R or Gemini 2.5 Flash better for coding?
Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.5 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and Gemini 2.5 Flash share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash has 54.