# Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Command R

> Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.1 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-sonnet-4-6-vs-command-r
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 Sonnet 4.6 leads 46.1 to 13.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 89.9% for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and 46.4% for Command R.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.6.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Noometry Index | 50.1 | 31.0 |
| Rank | 42 | 267 |
| Context | 1M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $3 | $0.15 |
| Output $/M | $15 | $0.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.0 (#62)
- Command R: 28.8 (#301)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1170 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.2% | — |
| DeepSWE | 29.9% | — |
| FrontierCode | 24.3% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1521 | — |
| SciCode | 46.8% | — |
| WeirdML | 66.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 17.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 45.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,327 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 39.1 (#26)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 53.4% | — |
| APEX-Agents | 43% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 9.3% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.9% | — |
| OSWorld | 72.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 23.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 48.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 18% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1221 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 7,204 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.1 (#40)
- Command R: 13.3 (#329)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1164 |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 46.4% |
| LMCA | 46.5% | 9.2% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 60.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80.9% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.5% | — |
| CritPt | 3.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 13% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 76.3% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 21.9% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 16% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 33.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.25 | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 27.5% |

## Math

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.9 (#41)
- Command R: 25.8 (#244)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1155 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 85.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 45% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 19.4% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 32.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 8.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.6 (#60)
- Command R: 30.5 (#219)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1500 | 1138 |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 35.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.6% | — |
| MMLU | — | 65.2% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 38.0 (#61)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 6.7% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1482 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 54.6 (#39)
- Command R: 35.9 (#240)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1174 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1491 | 1182 |
| LMArena French | 1465 | 1161 |
| LMArena German | 1428 | 1176 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1419 | 1143 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1162 |
| LMArena Russian | 1440 | 1174 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1465 | 1150 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 77.6 (#23)
- Command R: 58.3 (#256)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1167 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 55.6% |

## Long Context

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 45.3 (#40)
- Command R: 36.3 (#226)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1198 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Sonnet 4.6: 70.4 (#22)
- Command R: 38.4 (#248)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1187 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1170 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1163 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1810 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1207 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 16.7% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Command R?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.1 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Command R?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists at $3 and $15.

### Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Command R better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.0 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Command R share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Command R has 29.