# Command R vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

> Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-vs-qwen3-30b-a3b
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3-30B-A3B leads 55.6 to 38.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 46.4% for Command R and 69.3% for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $0.15 / $0.60 for Command R.
- Command R accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 41K.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 38.9 |
| Rank | 272 | 179 |
| Context | 128K | 41K |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | $0.12 |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | $0.50 |
| Weights | Open | Open |

## Coding

- Command R: 29.3 (#306)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1416 |
| SciCode | — | 33.3% |
| WeirdML | — | 29.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Command R: —
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 41.4% |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.8 (#331)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1398 |
| DTBench | 46.4% | 69.3% |
| LMCA | 9.2% | 22.4% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 54.9% |
| CritPt | — | 0.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 8% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 139.63 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 28.0 (#246)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1394 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 47.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 70.3% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 31.0 (#221)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1396 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 70.1% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.3% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.7 (#245)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1372 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1433 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | 1418 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1380 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1337 |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | 1331 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1370 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | 1404 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.1 (#261)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1363 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#231)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1379 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 40.6% |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.2 (#254)
- Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3-30B-A3B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1384 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1317 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1378 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 75.3% |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

### Which is cheaper, Command R or Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Command R lists at $0.15 and $0.60.

### Is Command R or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

Qwen3-30B-A3B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.5 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Command R does, with 128K tokens against 41K.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.