# Command A vs Qwen3 32B

> Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-a-vs-qwen3-32b
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3 32B in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Qwen3 32B leads 37.7 to 27.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Aider Polyglot: 12% for Command A and 40% for Qwen3 32B.
- Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Command A accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

## Snapshot

| | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 39.2 |
| Rank | 215 | 172 |
| Context | 256K | 131K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.70 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $2.80 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command A: 27.2 (#322)
- Qwen3 32B: 37.7 (#190)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | 40% |
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1358 |
| SciCode | — | 35.4% |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command A: 35.9 (#40)
- Qwen3 32B: 32.6 (#62)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | 48.7% |

## Reasoning

- Command A: 18.3 (#283)
- Qwen3 32B: 20.2 (#241)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | 54.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1334 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 67.5% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 17.3% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 138.51 |

## Math

- Command A: 36.2 (#171)
- Qwen3 32B: 39.7 (#99)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1399 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 66.9% |

## Knowledge

- Command A: 37.1 (#159)
- Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#125)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | 5.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1362 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 65.7% |

## Multilingual

- Command A: 45.3 (#170)
- Qwen3 32B: 45.6 (#167)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1317 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1357 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1341 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1311 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command A: 69.1 (#177)
- Qwen3 32B: 68.9 (#179)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1305 |

## Long Context

- Command A: 40.6 (#151)
- Qwen3 32B: 43.8 (#87)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1327 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 74.2% |

## Writing & Preference

- Command A: 47.6 (#208)
- Qwen3 32B: 52.9 (#163)

| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3 32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1297 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1331 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command A better than Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is the stronger model overall, scoring 39.2 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command A or Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command A or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Qwen3 32B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.7 versus 27.2 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 Qwen3 32B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.