# Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command R+

> Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-5-5-vs-command-r-plus
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 8 categories and Command R+ in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 80.2 to 9.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 68.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 5% for Command R+.
- Command R+ is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
- Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Noometry Index | 68.6 | 32.4 |
| Rank | 3 | 257 |
| Context | 1M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $4 | $2.50 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $10 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3)
- Command R+: 29.1 (#309)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1547 | 1187 |
| FrontierCode | 54.6% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1813 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 33.8% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 19.1% |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 41.9% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,147 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 56.7% |
| MBPP+ | — | 63.5% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15)
- Command R+: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 9,235 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3)
- Command R+: 9.2 (#344)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1535 | 1186 |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 54.9% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 167.33 | 119.34 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.3% | — |
| SimpleBench | — | 17.4% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 24.8% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 38.1% |
| LiveBench | — | 31.8% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3)
- Command R+: 28.9 (#242)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1506 | 1188 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 21.3% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10)
- Command R+: 36.4 (#169)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1547 | 1174 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 6.9% |
| MMLU | — | 69.4% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1)
- Command R+: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1321 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 51.2% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2)
- Command R+: 38.6 (#227)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1216 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1588 | 1226 |
| LMArena French | 1514 | 1209 |
| LMArena Russian | 1520 | 1227 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1507 | 1189 |
| LMArena German | — | 1216 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1166 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1138 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3)
- Command R+: 60.0 (#254)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1537 | 1197 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 57.6% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19)
- Command R+: 37.3 (#219)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1532 | 1230 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3)
- Command R+: 43.5 (#228)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1515 | 1229 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1533 | 1235 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1499 | 1213 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 29.7% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Command R+?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R+ costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Command R+?

Command R+ is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

### Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Command R+ better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Command R+ share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Command R+ has 34.