# Command R vs Qwen Turbo

> Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 3.0× 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-qwen-turbo
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 0

## Summary

- The widest gap is in math, where Command R leads 28.0 to 15.3.
- Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.20 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for Command R.
- Qwen Turbo accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 27.1 |
| Rank | 272 | 335 |
| Context | 128K | 1M |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.05 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.20 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command R: 29.3 (#306)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.8 (#331)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 28.0 (#246)
- Qwen Turbo: 15.3 (#297)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 6.1% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1155 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 56.2% |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 31.0 (#221)
- Qwen Turbo: 22.2 (#272)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | — | 41.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | — |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.7 (#245)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | — |
| LMArena French | 1162 | — |
| LMArena German | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.1 (#261)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#231)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.2 (#254)
- Qwen Turbo: —

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | — |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Qwen Turbo?

Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index. Qwen Turbo costs 3.0× 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 Qwen Turbo?

Qwen Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Command R lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen Turbo does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen Turbo share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen Turbo has 3.