# Claude 2.1 vs Command A

> Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-2-1-vs-command-a
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 1

## Summary

- They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Claude 2.1 scores higher in 1 category and Command A in 3 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Command A leads 33.5 to 9.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 51% for Claude 2.1 and 61.3% for Command A.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 35.9 |
| Rank | 340 | 212 |
| Context | — | 256K |
| Input $/M | — | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | — | $10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude 2.1: 25.8 (#322)
- Command A: 26.8 (#317)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | — | 12% |
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1331 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude 2.1: —
- Command A: 35.7 (#36)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 57.1% |

## Reasoning

- Claude 2.1: 20.6 (#216)
- Command A: 17.7 (#276)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| DTBench | 51% | 61.3% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 28.8% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1326 |
| LMCA | — | 10.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.22 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |

## Math

- Claude 2.1: 9.6 (#309)
- Command A: 33.5 (#172)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1300 |

## Knowledge

- Claude 2.1: 15.5 (#287)
- Command A: 36.5 (#157)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 9.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1295 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude 2.1: —
- Command A: 45.5 (#166)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1313 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1327 |
| LMArena French | — | 1352 |
| LMArena German | — | 1341 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1283 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1285 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1314 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1346 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude 2.1: —
- Command A: 69.3 (#172)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1309 |

## Long Context

- Claude 2.1: —
- Command A: 40.6 (#147)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1334 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude 2.1: —
- Command A: 47.8 (#204)

| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Command A |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1331 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1319 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1145 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1338 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude 2.1 better than Command A?

Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude 2.1 or Command A better for coding?

Command A scores higher on coding benchmarks: 26.8 versus 25.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Command A share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Command A has 24.