# Command A vs Gemma 2B

> Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-gemma-2b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 11

## Summary

- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 5 categories and Gemma 2B in 2 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Command A leads 47.8 to 24.1.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Google |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 29.1 |
| Rank | 212 | 305 |
| Context | 256K | — |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command A: 26.8 (#317)
- Gemma 2B: 28.9 (#300)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1331 | 1010 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 20.7% |
| MBPP+ | — | 34.1% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.7 (#36)
- Gemma 2B: —

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 17.7 (#276)
- Gemma 2B: 17.9 (#275)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 989 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 35.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 93.57 |
| HellaSwag | — | 71.4% |
| PIQA | — | 77.3% |
| WinoGrande | — | 65.4% |

## Math

- Command A: 33.5 (#172)
- Gemma 2B: 27.6 (#237)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1009 |
| GSM8K | — | 17.7% |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 36.5 (#157)
- Gemma 2B: —

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 42.1% |
| BoolQ | — | 69.4% |
| MMLU | — | 42.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 53.2% |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.5 (#166)
- Gemma 2B: 23.1 (#289)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 958 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 986 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 937 |
| LMArena French | 1352 | — |
| LMArena German | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1346 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.3 (#172)
- Gemma 2B: 48.8 (#297)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 971 |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#147)
- Gemma 2B: 29.9 (#286)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 981 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.8 (#204)
- Gemma 2B: 24.1 (#303)

| Benchmark | Command A | Gemma 2B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1002 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 986 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1338 | 945 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Gemma 2B?

Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command A or Gemma 2B better for coding?

Gemma 2B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.9 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and Gemma 2B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 2B has 23.