# Command R+ vs Qwen Max

> Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-qwen-max
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen Max in 6 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen Max leads 25.1 to 9.2.
- Qwen Max is cheaper at $1.60 / $6.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- Command R+ accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 33K.
- Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 34.7 |
| Rank | 257 | 230 |
| Context | 128K | 33K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $1.60 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $6.40 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command R+: 29.1 (#309)
- Qwen Max: 30.7 (#292)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1288 |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 21.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 9.2 (#344)
- Qwen Max: 25.1 (#151)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1269 |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| DTBench | 54.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| LMCA | 5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.34 | — |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |

## Math

- Command R+: 28.9 (#242)
- Qwen Max: 22.3 (#276)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1275 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 16.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 67.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 36.4 (#169)
- Qwen Max: 30.3 (#228)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1248 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 56.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.6 (#227)
- Qwen Max: 41.8 (#202)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1263 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1254 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | 1330 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1254 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | 1205 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | 1142 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1274 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1290 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.0 (#254)
- Qwen Max: 66.5 (#208)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1262 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#219)
- Qwen Max: 39.4 (#180)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 1288 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 66.7% |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.5 (#228)
- Qwen Max: 47.8 (#205)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1282 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1248 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1277 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 34.7 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen Max?

Qwen Max is cheaper. It lists at $1.60 per million input tokens and $6.40 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command R+ or Qwen Max better for coding?

Qwen Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 30.7 versus 29.1 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Command R+ does, with 128K tokens against 33K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen Max share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Max has 23.