Model comparison
Command R7B vs Qwen3.7 Max
Qwen3.7 Max has enough public results to be ranked (#35); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Command R7B leads 25.9 to 21.8.
- Command R7B is cheaper at $0.0375 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $7.50 for Qwen3.7 Max.
- Qwen3.7 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.1 | 51.4 |
| Released | 2024-12-02 | 2026-05-19 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1M |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.0375 | $2.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 1 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 50.2 (#43)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 77.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1515 |
| SciCode | — | 48.8% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1498 |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,189 |
Agentic & Tool Use Command R7B leads
Command R7B: 25.9, Qwen3.7 Max: 21.8 (#129)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 32.1% | — |
| GBAEval | — | 0.4% |
Reasoning Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 48.4 (#36)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | — | 70.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| CritPt | — | 13.4% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 19% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 9.5% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1483 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 32% |
| DTBench | — | 92.3% |
| LMCA | — | 44% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 153.74 |
Math Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 62.3 (#26)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 64.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 34.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 95.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 26% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1488 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 61.7 (#24)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 90.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 55.8% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1488 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 57.1 (#13)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1475 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1533 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1482 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 76.9 (#34)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1460 |
Long Context Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 45.4 (#34)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1484 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Command R7B: —, Qwen3.7 Max: 65.2 (#52)
| Benchmark | Command R7B | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1476 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1450 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1110 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1482 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R7B better than Qwen3.7 Max?
Qwen3.7 Max has enough public results to be ranked (#35); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Which is cheaper, Command R7B or Qwen3.7 Max?
Command R7B is cheaper. It lists at $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max lists at $2.50 and $7.50.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.7 Max does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R7B and Qwen3.7 Max share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R7B has 1 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.7 Max has 33.