# Command R vs Qwen1.5 4b Chat

> Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 to 28.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-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 6 categories and Qwen1.5 4b Chat in 2 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Command R leads 38.2 to 23.8.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 28.8 |
| Rank | 272 | 322 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R: 29.3 (#306)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 29.1 (#308)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 999 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.8 (#331)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 18.5 (#279)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 976 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 28.0 (#246)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.4 (#234)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1026 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 31.0 (#221)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 26.7 (#255)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 980 |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.7 (#245)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 24.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 979 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1024 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 902 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 952 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | — |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.1 (#261)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 49.0 (#300)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 978 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#231)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 30.1 (#290)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 988 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.2 (#254)
- Qwen1.5 4b Chat: 23.8 (#309)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5 4b Chat |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 997 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 969 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 977 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

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

Command R is the stronger model overall, scoring 31.4 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 (29.3 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 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5 4b Chat has 13.