Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Command R

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Command R Cohere

31.4

Rank #272 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and Command R in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 64.7 to 13.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 94.9% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 46.4% for Command R.
  • Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8 and Command R specifications
Claude Opus 4.8Command R
ProviderAnthropicCohere
Noometry Index60.731.4
Released2026-05-282024-08-30
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K4K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.60
Results tracked6529

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Command R: 29.3 (#306)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Coding14901169
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—
WeirdML82.9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.1%
LiveBench Coding—17.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—45.2%
ALE-Bench1,564—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Command R: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Command R: 13.8 (#331)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Hard Prompts14821164
DTBench94.9%46.4%
LMCA57.5%9.2%
ARC-AGI-272.1%—
SimpleBench64.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
ARC-AGI-192.5%—
CritPt20.9%—
Chess Puzzles34%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
LiveBench Reasoning—21.9%
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—33.3%
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21—
ForecastBench59.9—
LiveBench—27.5%

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Command R: 28.0 (#246)

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Command R: 31.0 (#221)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Expert15021138
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified53%—
MMLU—65.2%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Command R: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Vision1294—
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Command R: 35.7 (#245)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Non-English14501174
LMArena Chinese15071182
LMArena French14811162
LMArena German14721176
LMArena Japanese14401143
LMArena Korean14321163
LMArena Russian14741174
LMArena Spanish14661151

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Command R: 58.1 (#261)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Instruction Following14761167
LiveBench Instruction Following—55.6%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Command R: 36.3 (#231)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Longer Query14831198

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Command R: 38.2 (#254)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Command R
LMArena Text14611187
LMArena Creative Writing14541170
LMArena Multi-Turn14761163
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
EQ-Bench 41281—
LiveBench Language—16.7%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Command R?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 38× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Command R?

Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Command R better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Command R share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Command R has 29.

Related comparisons

Go deeper