Model comparison
Command R vs Qwen3.6 Plus
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.6 Plus in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Qwen3.6 Plus leads 56.1 to 31.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 81.9% for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Qwen3.6 Plus.
- Qwen3.6 Plus accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2026-03-31 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 4K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $0.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $3 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), Qwen3.6 Plus: 40.8 (#130)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1467 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 57.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1461 |
| SciCode | — | 40.7% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 670.15 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R: —, Qwen3.6 Plus: —
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 5,115 |
Reasoning Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), Qwen3.6 Plus: 29.3 (#93)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1449 |
| DTBench | 46.4% | 81.9% |
| LMCA | 9.2% | 33.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 60.3% |
| CritPt | — | 2.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 17% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 59.5% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 12% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 147.65 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 28.0 (#246), Qwen3.6 Plus: 51.8 (#54)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1450 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 38.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 93.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 26.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 8.3% |
Knowledge Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), Qwen3.6 Plus: 56.1 (#45)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1454 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 88.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 44.1% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multilingual Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), Qwen3.6 Plus: 53.3 (#70)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1424 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1477 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | 1455 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1452 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1389 |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | 1379 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1434 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | 1432 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), Qwen3.6 Plus: 75.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1425 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), Qwen3.6 Plus: 45.2 (#49)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1439 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.3% |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.6 Plus leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), Qwen3.6 Plus: 62.2 (#82)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.6 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1437 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1404 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1438 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than Qwen3.6 Plus?
Qwen3.6 Plus is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Qwen3.6 Plus's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or Qwen3.6 Plus?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3.6 Plus lists at $0.50 and $3.
Is Command R or Qwen3.6 Plus better for coding?
Qwen3.6 Plus scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.6 Plus does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen3.6 Plus share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.6 Plus has 37.