# Command R+ vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

> Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-qwen1-5-4b-chat
- Last updated: 2026-10-11
- Shared benchmarks: 13

## Summary

- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Command R+ leads 43.5 to 23.8.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.4 | 28.8 |
| Rank | 257 | 322 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | — |
| Output $/M | $10 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R+: 29.1 (#309)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 999 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 9.2 (#344)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 976 |
| 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)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1026 |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 36.4 (#169)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 980 |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | — |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.6 (#227)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1209 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.0 (#254)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 978 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#219)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1230 | 988 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.5 (#228)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 977 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than Qwen1.5 4b Chat?

Command R+ is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.4 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command R+ or Qwen1.5 4b Chat better for coding?

They score almost the same on coding (29.1 vs 29.1); test both on your own repository before choosing.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen1.5 4b Chat share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.