# Command A vs Qwen2-72B

> Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-qwen2-72b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2-72B in 2 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Command A leads 35.7 to 16.9.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 35.9 | 29.5 |
| Rank | 212 | 294 |
| Context | 256K | — |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command A: 26.8 (#317)
- Qwen2-72B: 28.7 (#303)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1331 | 1196 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 11.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 38.5% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.7 (#36)
- Qwen2-72B: 16.9 (#138)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 1.1% |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 29.9% |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 17.7 (#276)
- Qwen2-72B: 22.2 (#184)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1191 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| DTBench | 61.3% | — |
| LMCA | 10.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 125.27 |

## Math

- Command A: 33.5 (#172)
- Qwen2-72B: 27.9 (#232)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1235 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 39.1% |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 36.5 (#157)
- Qwen2-72B: 21.2 (#270)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1171 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 40.8% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
| MMLU | — | 82.4% |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.5 (#166)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.0 (#239)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1176 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1240 |
| LMArena French | 1352 | 1169 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1151 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1283 | 1111 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1083 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1169 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1346 | 1168 |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.3 (#172)
- Qwen2-72B: 62.0 (#236)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1181 |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#147)
- Qwen2-72B: 36.1 (#230)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1193 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.8 (#204)
- Qwen2-72B: 41.0 (#236)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2-72B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1203 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1181 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1338 | 1195 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Qwen2-72B?

Command A is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 29.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command A or Qwen2-72B better for coding?

Qwen2-72B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.7 versus 26.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Command A and Qwen2-72B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2-72B has 26.