Model comparison
Command R vs GLM-4.6V
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
CohereSummary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-4.6V in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where GLM-4.6V leads 56.6 to 38.2.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.30 / $0.90 for GLM-4.6V.
Side by side
| Command R | GLM-4.6V | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Z.ai (Zhipu) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2025-12-08 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | 128K |
| Max output | 4K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.30 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $0.90 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1390 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1368 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Not comparable
Command R: 28.0 (#246), GLM-4.6V: —
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1155 | — |
Knowledge GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1371 |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command R: —, GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1164 |
Multilingual GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1425 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1340 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | — |
| LMArena German | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | — |
Instruction Following GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1352 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1358 |
Writing & Preference GLM-4.6V leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Command R | GLM-4.6V |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1377 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1347 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1360 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than GLM-4.6V?
GLM-4.6V is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 1.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GLM-4.6V's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or GLM-4.6V?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GLM-4.6V lists at $0.30 and $0.90.
Is Command R or GLM-4.6V better for coding?
GLM-4.6V scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.9 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 128K tokens.
How many benchmarks do Command R and GLM-4.6V share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.