# Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Command R

> Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-sonnet-5-5-vs-command-r
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 12

## Summary

- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 5.5 leads 87.9 to 28.0.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.5.
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Noometry Index | 61.9 | 31.4 |
| Rank | 10 | 272 |
| Context | 1M | 128K |
| Input $/M | $2 | $0.15 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $0.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 67.3 (#6)
- Command R: 29.3 (#306)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1513 | 1169 |
| FrontierCode | 52.1% | — |
| CursorBench | 55.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1774 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 61.9% | — |
| SciCode | 61% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 37.1% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 17.9% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 45.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,819 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.0 (#16)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 75.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 54.0 (#28)
- Command R: 13.8 (#331)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1495 | 1164 |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 21.9% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 65% | — |
| DTBench | — | 46.4% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 33.3% |
| LMCA | — | 9.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 165.03 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 27.5% |

## Math

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 87.9 (#6)
- Command R: 28.0 (#246)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1510 | 1155 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 88.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 80.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 19.4% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#12)
- Command R: 31.0 (#221)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1540 | 1138 |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.6% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.5% | — |
| MMLU | — | 65.2% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 51.5 (#6)
- Command R: —

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1289 | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 75% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 55.3 (#30)
- Command R: 35.7 (#245)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1174 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1522 | 1182 |
| LMArena Russian | 1451 | 1174 |
| LMArena French | — | 1162 |
| LMArena German | — | 1176 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1143 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1163 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1151 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 78.3 (#11)
- Command R: 58.1 (#261)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1495 | 1167 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 55.6% |

## Long Context

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.9 (#28)
- Command R: 36.3 (#231)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1498 | 1198 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#40)
- Command R: 38.2 (#254)

| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Command R |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | 1187 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1170 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1474 | 1163 |
| LiveBench Language | — | 16.7% |

## FAQ

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

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 and $10.

### Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Command R better for coding?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.3 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

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

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

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 32 scored results on Noometry and Command R has 29.