Noometry

Model comparison

Command R vs Qwen3.6 Flash

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Command R Cohere

31.4

Rank #272 Confirmed

Qwen3.6 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #182 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.6 Flash leads 29.0 to 13.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 77.1% for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.19 / $1.13 for Qwen3.6 Flash.
  • Qwen3.6 Flash accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command RQwen3.6 Flash
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index31.438.8
Released2024-08-302026-04-27
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1M
Max output4K66K
Input $ / M tokens$0.15$0.19
Output $ / M tokens$0.60$1.13
Results tracked2913

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R: 29.3 (#306), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
BigCodeBench Instruct37.1%—
LiveBench Coding17.9%—
LMArena Coding1169—
BigCodeBench Complete45.2%—
ALE-Bench—326.4

Reasoning Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R: 13.8 (#331), Qwen3.6 Flash: 29.0 (#96)

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
DTBench46.4%77.1%
LMCA9.2%31%
SimpleBench—35.2%
Chess Puzzles—20%
LiveBench Reasoning21.9%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1164—
Mystery Game Puzzles—18%
LiveBench Data Analysis33.3%—
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.26
LiveBench27.5%—

Math Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R: 28.0 (#246), Qwen3.6 Flash: 39.0 (#117)

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—22.5%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
LiveBench Math19.4%—
LMArena Math1155—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—10.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.6 Flash leads

Command R: 31.0 (#221), Qwen3.6 Flash: 42.1 (#100)

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
GPQA Diamond—83.3%
SimpleQA Verified—15.9%
LMArena Expert1138—
MMLU65.2%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R: 35.7 (#245), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
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), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
LiveBench Instruction Following55.6%—
LMArena Instruction Following1167—

Long Context Not comparable

Command R: 36.3 (#231), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1198—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R: 38.2 (#254), Qwen3.6 Flash: —

BenchmarkCommand RQwen3.6 Flash
LMArena Text1187—
LMArena Creative Writing1170—
LMArena Multi-Turn1163—
LiveBench Language16.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R better than Qwen3.6 Flash?

Qwen3.6 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.8 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Command R or Qwen3.6 Flash?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Flash lists at $0.19 and $1.13.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.6 Flash does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen3.6 Flash share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Flash has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper