# Command A vs Qwen2.5 72B Instruct

> Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command A's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-qwen2-5-72b-instruct
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Command A leads 33.5 to 18.1.
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is cheaper at $1.40 / $5.60 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Command A accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 31.5 |
| Rank | 212 | 259 |
| Context | 256K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $1.40 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $5.60 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command A: 26.8 (#317)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 32.8 (#256)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1331 | 1293 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 16% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.8% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 55.9% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.7 (#36)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 22.0 (#124)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 5.7% |
| BALROG | — | 16.2% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 35.8% |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 17.7 (#276)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 21.4 (#197)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1271 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 62.9% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 13.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 79.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 129.01 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.5 |
| HellaSwag | — | 84.8% |
| PIQA | — | 82.6% |
| WinoGrande | — | 82.3% |

## Math

- Command A: 33.5 (#172)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 18.1 (#281)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1283 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 8.1% |
| Omni-MATH | — | 33% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 63.2% |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 36.5 (#157)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 26.9 (#247)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1245 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 49.1% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 63.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 19.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 94.5% |
| MMLU | — | 85.3% |
| TriviaQA | — | 71.9% |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.5 (#166)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 41.2 (#208)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1252 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1272 |
| LMArena French | 1352 | 1279 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1234 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1283 | 1180 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1188 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1264 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1346 | 1255 |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.3 (#172)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 65.7 (#216)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1254 |
| IFEval | — | 80.6% |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#147)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 38.9 (#183)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1282 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.8 (#204)
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct: 46.9 (#210)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1269 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1221 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1338 | 1272 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
| WildBench | — | 80.2% |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 31.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 72B Instruct costs 1.8× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command A's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Command A or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $1.40 per million input tokens and $5.60 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command A or Qwen2.5 72B Instruct better for coding?

Qwen2.5 72B Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.8 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Command A does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 72B Instruct has 43.