Noometry

Model comparison

Command R vs GPT-5.1-Codex

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Command R Cohere

31.4

Rank #272 Confirmed

GPT-5.1-Codex OpenAI

38.6

Rank #186 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.1-Codex leads 41.9 to 29.3.
  • Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $10 for GPT-5.1-Codex.
  • GPT-5.1-Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command RGPT-5.1-Codex
ProviderCohereOpenAI
Noometry Index31.438.6
Released2024-08-302025-11-12
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K400K
Max output4K128K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$10
Results tracked296

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

Category by category

Coding GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Command R: 29.3 (#306), GPT-5.1-Codex: 41.9 (#116)

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—66%
LMArena WebDev—1337
BigCodeBench Instruct37.1%—
LiveBench Coding17.9%—
LMArena Coding1169—
BigCodeBench Complete45.2%—
ALE-Bench—1,245

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Command R: —, GPT-5.1-Codex: 38.0 (#33)

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
Terminal-Bench—60.4%
METR Time Horizons—70.8%

Reasoning Not comparable

Command R: 13.8 (#331), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Reasoning21.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1164—
DTBench46.4%—
LiveBench Data Analysis33.3%—
LMCA9.2%—
LiveBench27.5%—

Math GPT-5.1-Codex leads

Command R: 28.0 (#246), GPT-5.1-Codex: 30.3 (#235)

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
ProofBench—9%
LiveBench Math19.4%—
LMArena Math1155—

Knowledge Not comparable

Command R: 31.0 (#221), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Expert1138—
MMLU65.2%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R: 35.7 (#245), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Non-English1174—
LMArena Chinese1182—
LMArena French1162—
LMArena German1176—
LMArena Japanese1143—
LMArena Korean1163—
LMArena Russian1174—
LMArena Spanish1151—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Command R: 58.1 (#261), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LiveBench Instruction Following55.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1167—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R: 36.3 (#231), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Longer Query1198—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R: 38.2 (#254), GPT-5.1-Codex: —

BenchmarkCommand RGPT-5.1-Codex
LMArena Text1187—
LMArena Creative Writing1170—
LMArena Multi-Turn1163—
LiveBench Language16.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R better than GPT-5.1-Codex?

GPT-5.1-Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 13× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.1-Codex's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Command R or GPT-5.1-Codex?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GPT-5.1-Codex lists at $1.25 and $10.

Is Command R or GPT-5.1-Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.1-Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.9 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.1-Codex does, with 400K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R and GPT-5.1-Codex share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.1-Codex has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper