# Command R vs Llama 3.2 1B

> Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.0 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-vs-llama-3-2-1b
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 15

## Summary

- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 7 categories and Llama 3.2 1B in 1 category; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Command R leads 30.5 to 7.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is BigCodeBench Complete: 45.2% for Command R and 11.3% for Llama 3.2 1B.
- Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper at $0.027 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for Command R.
- Command R accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 60K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 19.9 |
| Rank | 267 | 349 |
| Context | 128K | 60K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.027 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.20 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R: 28.8 (#301)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 20.6 (#333)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | 8.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | 1071 |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | 11.3% |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command R: —
- Llama 3.2 1B: 14.5 (#142)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10.8% |
| BALROG | — | 6.6% |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.3 (#329)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 15.6 (#304)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1044 |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 0% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 101.95 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 25.8 (#244)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 9.7 (#308)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1086 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 0.6% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 30.5 (#219)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#307)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1007 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 23.9% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.9 (#240)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 23.9 (#287)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 958 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1014 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 941 |
| LMArena French | 1161 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.3 (#256)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 52.6 (#285)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1031 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#226)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#269)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1050 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.4 (#248)
- Llama 3.2 1B: 21.4 (#305)

| Benchmark | Command R | Llama 3.2 1B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1055 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1030 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 200 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Llama 3.2 1B?

Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.0 to 19.9 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.2 1B costs 3.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Command R's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Command R or Llama 3.2 1B?

Llama 3.2 1B is cheaper. It lists at $0.027 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Command R lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

### Is Command R or Llama 3.2 1B better for coding?

Command R scores higher on coding benchmarks: 28.8 versus 20.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Command R does, with 128K tokens against 60K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Llama 3.2 1B share?

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.2 1B has 22.