Model comparison
Command R vs o3-mini
o3-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 7.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-mini's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 26 shared benchmarks.
CohereSummary
- They share 26 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 1 category and o3-mini in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in instruction following, where o3-mini leads 75.3 to 58.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LiveBench Reasoning: 21.9% for Command R and 89.6% for o3-mini.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.10 / $4.40 for o3-mini.
- o3-mini accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command R | o3-mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 36.7 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2024-12-20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 200K |
| Max output | 4K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $1.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $4.40 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 51 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding o3-mini leads
Command R: 28.8 (#301), o3-mini: 41.4 (#116)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | 82.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | 1378 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 60.4% |
| SciCode | — | 39.8% |
| GSO | — | 1.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 43.7% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
| CadEval | — | 54% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R: —, o3-mini: 29.3 (#79)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| Cybench | — | 22.5% |
Reasoning o3-mini leads
Command R: 13.3 (#329), o3-mini: 16.3 (#295)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | 89.6% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1366 |
| DTBench | 46.4% | 68.8% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | 70.6% |
| LMCA | 9.2% | 19% |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | 75.9% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 3% |
| SimpleBench | — | 22.8% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 34.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 140.35 |
| ForecastBench | — | 59.6 |
Math o3-mini leads
Command R: 25.8 (#244), o3-mini: 27.6 (#236)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | 77.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1396 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 18.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 0% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 76.9% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 96.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 12.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge o3-mini leads
Command R: 30.5 (#219), o3-mini: 38.3 (#135)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1364 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 77% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 15.3% |
| Confabulations | — | 17.9% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multilingual o3-mini leads
Command R: 35.9 (#240), o3-mini: 45.9 (#159)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1319 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1379 |
| LMArena French | 1161 | 1333 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1303 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1286 |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | 1314 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1304 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | 1321 |
Instruction Following o3-mini leads
Command R: 58.3 (#256), o3-mini: 75.3 (#67)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | 84.4% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1338 |
Long Context Command R leads
Command R: 36.3 (#226), o3-mini: 33.8 (#251)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1343 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 50% |
Writing & Preference o3-mini leads
Command R: 38.4 (#248), o3-mini: 50.4 (#177)
| Benchmark | Command R | o3-mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1337 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1286 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1320 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | 50.7% |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 61.7% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than o3-mini?
o3-mini is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.7 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 7.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3-mini's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or o3-mini?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; o3-mini lists at $1.10 and $4.40.
Is Command R or o3-mini better for coding?
o3-mini scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.4 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
o3-mini does, with 200K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and o3-mini share?
26 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and o3-mini has 51.