# Command A vs GPT-5.2 Codex

> GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-gpt-5-2-codex
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.2 Codex leads 45.4 to 26.8.
- Command A is cheaper at $2.50 / $10 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2 Codex.
- GPT-5.2 Codex accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 256K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 42.2 |
| Rank | 212 | 107 |
| Context | 256K | 400K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $1.75 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $14 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command A: 26.8 (#317)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: 45.4 (#66)

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 72.8% |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1339 |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 66.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1331 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,300 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.7 (#36)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: 40.7 (#20)

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 66.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 17.7 (#276)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | — |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |

## Math

- Command A: 33.5 (#172)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | — |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 36.5 (#157)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | — |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.5 (#166)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | — |
| LMArena French | 1352 | — |
| LMArena German | 1341 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1283 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1346 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.3 (#172)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | — |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#147)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.8 (#204)
- GPT-5.2 Codex: —

| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.2 Codex |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1338 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than GPT-5.2 Codex?

GPT-5.2 Codex is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.2 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command A or GPT-5.2 Codex?

Command A is cheaper. It lists at $2.50 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 Codex lists at $1.75 and $14.

### Is Command A or GPT-5.2 Codex better for coding?

GPT-5.2 Codex scores higher on coding benchmarks: 45.4 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-5.2 Codex does, with 400K tokens against 256K.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and GPT-5.2 Codex share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.2 Codex has 5.