# Command R+ vs Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)

> Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-grok-4-20
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 20

## Summary

- They share 20 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 0 categories and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) leads 52.3 to 9.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 54.9% for Command R+ and 90.1% for Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning).
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper at $1.25 / $2.50 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 48.6 |
| Rank | 257 | 54 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $1.25 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $2.50 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command R+: 29.1 (#309)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 42.1 (#112)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1459 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1375 |
| WeirdML | — | 52.3% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,150 |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command R+: —
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 34.4 (#46)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | — | 57.3% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 18% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1189 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 4,663 |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 9.2 (#344)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.3 (#32)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1451 |
| DTBench | 54.9% | 90.1% |
| LMCA | 5% | 38.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.34 | 151.98 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 65.1% |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 75% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 89.5% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 24% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 63.8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 61.4 |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |

## Math

- Command R+: 28.9 (#242)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 48.2 (#65)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1455 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 17.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 92.2% |
| ProofBench | — | 14% |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 36.4 (#169)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 52.8 (#60)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1439 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 89.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 30.2% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- Command R+: —
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 33.3 (#98)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1263 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
| LMArena Document | — | 1416 |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.6 (#227)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 54.5 (#40)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1441 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1481 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | 1476 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1465 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | 1449 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | 1417 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1458 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1443 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.0 (#254)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 74.8 (#83)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1420 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#219)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 45.5 (#34)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 1437 |
| CL-bench | — | 22.2% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 11.9% |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.5 (#228)
- Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning): 65.7 (#44)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1451 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1438 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1456 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1574 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is the stronger model overall, scoring 48.6 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning)?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command R+ or Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) better for coding?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.1 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.20 (Non-Reasoning) has 46.