# Command A vs Qwen1.5-110B

> Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-qwen1-5-110b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 6 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multilingual, where Command A leads 45.5 to 33.8.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 212 | 231 |
| Context | 256K | — |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command A: 26.8 (#317)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1331 | 1184 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 35% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 44.4% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.7 (#36)
- Qwen1.5-110B: —

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 17.7 (#276)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1168 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.7 |

## Math

- Command A: 33.5 (#172)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1185 |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 36.5 (#157)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1144 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.5 (#166)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1142 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1206 |
| LMArena French | 1352 | 1150 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1123 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1283 | 1074 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1044 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1118 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1346 | 1141 |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.3 (#172)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1158 |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#147)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1157 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.8 (#204)
- Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen1.5-110B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1175 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1148 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1338 | 1160 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command A or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.4 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.