# Command R vs Qwen3.5 Max Preview

> Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/command-r-vs-qwen3-5-max-preview
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 17

## Summary

- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.5 Max Preview in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Qwen3.5 Max Preview leads 66.1 to 38.4.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.0 | 44.7 |
| Rank | 267 | 72 |
| Context | 128K | — |
| Input $/M | $0.15 | — |
| Output $/M | $0.60 | — |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Command R: 28.8 (#301)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 43.4 (#79)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1170 | 1488 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |

## Reasoning

- Command R: 13.3 (#329)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 29.6 (#81)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1483 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |

## Math

- Command R: 25.8 (#244)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 37.3 (#99)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1473 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |

## Knowledge

- Command R: 30.5 (#219)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 41.1 (#104)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1489 |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |

## Multilingual

- Command R: 35.9 (#240)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 56.4 (#21)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1465 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1534 |
| LMArena French | 1161 | 1483 |
| LMArena German | 1176 | 1487 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | 1497 |
| LMArena Korean | 1162 | 1438 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1472 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1150 | 1470 |

## Instruction Following

- Command R: 58.3 (#256)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 77.2 (#28)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1467 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |

## Long Context

- Command R: 36.3 (#226)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 45.2 (#44)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1477 |

## Writing & Preference

- Command R: 38.4 (#248)
- Qwen3.5 Max Preview: 66.1 (#39)

| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen3.5 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1471 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1464 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1478 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |

## FAQ

### Is Command R better than Qwen3.5 Max Preview?

Qwen3.5 Max Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 44.7 to 31.0 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Command R or Qwen3.5 Max Preview better for coding?

Qwen3.5 Max Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.4 versus 28.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen3.5 Max Preview share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Max Preview has 17.