# Claude Opus 4.1 vs Command R+

> Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-command-r-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Command R+ in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 31.6 to 8.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 60% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 17.4% for Command R+.
- Command R+ is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Claude Opus 4.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
- Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Noometry Index | 40.8 | 32.0 |
| Rank | 136 | 251 |
| Context | 200K | 128K |
| Input $/M | $15 | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.3 (#69)
- Command R+: 28.6 (#304)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1187 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| WeirdML | 45.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 19.1% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 41.9% |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 56.7% |
| MBPP+ | — | 63.5% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 34.8 (#38)
- Command R+: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 31.6 (#70)
- Command R+: 8.9 (#341)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 60% | 17.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1186 |
| DTBench | 80% | 54.9% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.11 | 119.28 |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 24.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 38.1% |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 31.8% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.0 (#267)
- Command R+: 26.6 (#239)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1430 | 1188 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 21.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 41.9 (#93)
- Command R+: 35.9 (#165)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | 6.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1174 |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| MMLU | — | 69.4% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.2 (#114)
- Command R+: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.1 (#90)
- Command R+: 38.8 (#222)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1216 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1226 |
| LMArena French | 1432 | 1208 |
| LMArena German | 1412 | 1216 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1166 |
| LMArena Korean | 1381 | 1138 |
| LMArena Russian | 1421 | 1227 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1189 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.8 (#53)
- Command R+: 60.2 (#249)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1436 | 1197 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 57.6% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#60)
- Command R+: 37.3 (#214)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1231 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.6 (#70)
- Command R+: 43.7 (#223)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1229 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1235 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1213 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 29.7% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Command R+?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.8 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Command R+?

Command R+ is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Command R+ better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.3 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.1 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Command R+ share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Command R+ has 34.