# Command R+ vs Qwen3.5 122B-A10B

> Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-plus-vs-qwen3-5-122b-a10b
- 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 Qwen3.5 122B-A10B in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen3.5 122B-A10B leads 26.4 to 8.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 54.9% for Command R+ and 84.3% for Qwen3.5 122B-A10B.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is cheaper at $0.40 / $3.20 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B accepts more context: 262K tokens versus 128K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 32.0 | 41.6 |
| Rank | 251 | 120 |
| Context | 128K | 262K |
| Input $/M | $2.50 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $10 | $3.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R+: 28.6 (#304)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.8 (#155)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1187 | 1436 |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1360 |
| SciCode | — | 35.6% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 33.8% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 19.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 41.9% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 56.7% | — |
| MBPP+ | 63.5% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R+: 8.9 (#341)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 26.4 (#121)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1186 | 1421 |
| DTBench | 54.9% | 84.3% |
| LMCA | 5% | 32.2% |
| SimpleBench | 17.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 51.7% |
| CritPt | — | 0.9% |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 51.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 24.8% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 17% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 38.1% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.28 | — |
| LiveBench | 31.8% | — |

## Math

- Command R+: 26.6 (#239)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 36.4 (#114)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1188 | 1432 |
| LiveBench Math | 21.3% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R+: 35.9 (#165)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 38.2 (#138)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 6.9% | 11.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1174 | 1431 |
| MMLU | 69.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- Command R+: —
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 39.0 (#52)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1245 |

## Multilingual

- Command R+: 38.8 (#222)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 51.8 (#101)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1216 | 1400 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1226 | 1462 |
| LMArena French | 1208 | 1442 |
| LMArena German | 1216 | 1425 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1166 | 1364 |
| LMArena Korean | 1138 | 1353 |
| LMArena Russian | 1227 | 1400 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1189 | 1423 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R+: 60.2 (#249)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 74.0 (#109)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1197 | 1399 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 57.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R+: 37.3 (#214)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 43.0 (#105)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1231 | 1410 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R+: 43.7 (#223)
- Qwen3.5 122B-A10B: 60.2 (#98)

| Benchmark | Command R+ | Qwen3.5 122B-A10B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1417 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1235 | 1369 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1213 | 1416 |
| LiveBench Language | 29.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R+ better than Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.6 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command R+ or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $3.20 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

### Is Command R+ or Qwen3.5 122B-A10B better for coding?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 38.8 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 122B-A10B does, with 262K tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B share?

20 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 122B-A10B has 27.