Model comparison
Command R vs Gemini 3.5 Flash
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 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 3.5 Flash in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 62.8 to 13.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 94.7% for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.50 / $9 for Gemini 3.5 Flash.
- Gemini 3.5 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 3.5 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 54.2 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 4K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $1.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $9 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 54 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 49.4 (#49)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1492 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 79.3% |
| DeepSWE | — | 37.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1499 |
| SciCode | — | 53.1% |
| WeirdML | — | 62.6% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 911.02 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R: —, Gemini 3.5 Flash: 24.7 (#114)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 27.5% |
| GBAEval | — | 6.7% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 14% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,396 |
Reasoning Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 62.8 (#18)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1488 |
| DTBench | 46.4% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 9.2% | 47.1% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 72.1% |
| SimpleBench | — | 76.7% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 92.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 92.5% |
| CritPt | — | 13.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 50% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 25.4% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 4.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 58.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 154.46 |
| ForecastBench | — | 59 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 28.0 (#246), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 60.7 (#36)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1504 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 62.8% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 26.8% |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 76.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 31% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 66.3 (#11)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1495 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 66.2% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command R: —, Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.7 (#15)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1310 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 33.6% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1463 |
Multilingual Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 57.0 (#13)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1476 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1526 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | 1490 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1492 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1486 |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | 1451 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1493 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | 1480 |
Instruction Following Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 77.0 (#30)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1467 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 45.4 (#38)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1482 |
Writing & Preference Gemini 3.5 Flash leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), Gemini 3.5 Flash: 65.5 (#47)
| Benchmark | Command R | Gemini 3.5 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1482 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1470 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1481 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1087 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Gemini 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.2 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Gemini 3.5 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or Gemini 3.5 Flash?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Gemini 3.5 Flash lists at $1.50 and $9.
Is Command R or Gemini 3.5 Flash better for coding?
Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.4 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.5 Flash does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and Gemini 3.5 Flash share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.5 Flash has 54.