# Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command R

> Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 30× 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
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 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 math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 92.4 to 25.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 68.2% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 9.2% for Command R.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 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 | 68.5 | 31.0 |
| Rank | 3 | 267 |
| Context | 1M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $4 | $0.15 |
| Output $/M | $20 | $0.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 5.5: 71.4 (#1)
- Command R: 28.8 (#301)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1545 | 1170 |
| FrontierCode | 54.4% | — |
| CursorBench | 57.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1820 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 62.3% | — |
| SciCode | 66.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 17.9% |
| MirrorCode | 77.4% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 45.2% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#13)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 73.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 5.5: 79.5 (#2)
- Command R: 13.3 (#329)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1545 | 1164 |
| DTBench | 98.9% | 46.4% |
| LMCA | 68.2% | 9.2% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 92.5% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 88.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.7% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 71.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 21.9% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 71% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 33.3% |
| LiveBench | — | 27.5% |

## Math

- Claude Opus 5.5: 92.4 (#2)
- Command R: 25.8 (#244)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 91.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 95% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 19.4% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1155 |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 5.5: 66.6 (#9)
- Command R: 30.5 (#219)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1564 | 1138 |
| GPQA Diamond | 90.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 72.2% | — |
| MMLU | — | 65.2% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 5.5: 56.5 (#2)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| Furniture Assembly | 83.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 5.5: 59.8 (#1)
- Command R: 35.9 (#240)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1513 | 1174 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1572 | 1182 |
| LMArena Russian | 1532 | 1174 |
| LMArena French | — | 1161 |
| LMArena German | — | 1176 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1143 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1162 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1150 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 5.5: 80.1 (#2)
- Command R: 58.3 (#256)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1535 | 1167 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 55.6% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 5.5: 47.3 (#18)
- Command R: 36.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1540 | 1198 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 5.5: 78.7 (#3)
- Command R: 38.4 (#248)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1518 | 1187 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1538 | 1170 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1520 | 1163 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2050 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 16.7% |

## FAQ

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

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 30× 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 $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 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: 71.4 versus 28.8 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?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 35 scored results on Noometry and Command R has 29.