Model comparison
Command A vs GPT-5.4 nano
GPT-5.4 nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
CohereSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-5.4 nano in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where GPT-5.4 nano leads 43.6 to 27.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 10.3% for Command A and 36.9% for GPT-5.4 nano.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- GPT-5.4 nano accepts more context: 400K tokens versus 256K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command A | GPT-5.4 nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 41.9 |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | 2026-03-17 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 400K |
| Max output | 8K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $0.20 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.25 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 27.2 (#322), GPT-5.4 nano: 43.6 (#84)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1405 |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| SciCode | — | 46.9% |
| WeirdML | — | 49.2% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 1,005 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command A: 35.9 (#40), GPT-5.4 nano: —
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
Reasoning GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 18.3 (#283), GPT-5.4 nano: 23.7 (#173)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | 39.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1381 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 80.3% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 36.9% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 5.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 51.5% |
| CritPt | — | 9.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 30% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 145.81 |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.3 |
Math GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 36.2 (#171), GPT-5.4 nano: 40.9 (#88)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1406 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 44.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 12.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 87.8% |
| ProofBench | — | 5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 25.9% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 6.3% |
Knowledge GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 37.1 (#159), GPT-5.4 nano: 41.9 (#103)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | 3.1% |
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1396 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 78.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 11.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command A: —, GPT-5.4 nano: 36.7 (#78)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1196 |
Multilingual GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 45.3 (#170), GPT-5.4 nano: 48.6 (#140)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1359 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1392 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | 1396 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1367 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | 1343 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1320 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1363 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | 1371 |
Instruction Following GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 69.1 (#177), GPT-5.4 nano: 71.9 (#144)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1362 |
Long Context GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 40.6 (#151), GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#137)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1366 |
Writing & Preference GPT-5.4 nano leads
Command A: 47.6 (#208), GPT-5.4 nano: 55.7 (#142)
| Benchmark | Command A | GPT-5.4 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1372 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1314 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1382 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A better than GPT-5.4 nano?
GPT-5.4 nano is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.9 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Command A or GPT-5.4 nano?
GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.
Is Command A or GPT-5.4 nano better for coding?
GPT-5.4 nano scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.6 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.4 nano does, with 400K tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Command A and GPT-5.4 nano share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and GPT-5.4 nano has 40.