Model comparison
Command A vs Qwen3.8 Max
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command A scores higher in 0 categories and Qwen3.8 Max in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3.8 Max leads 73.2 to 36.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 10.3% for Command A and 46.2% for Qwen3.8 Max.
- Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command A.
- Qwen3.8 Max accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 256K.
- Command A has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command A | Qwen3.8 Max | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 36.5 | 56.8 |
| Released | 2025-03-13 | 2026-08-02 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 256K | 1M |
| Max output | 8K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2.50 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $6 |
| Results tracked | 24 | 39 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 27.2 (#322), Qwen3.8 Max: 53.5 (#29)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1330 | 1502 |
| DeepSWE | — | 57.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | 12% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1674 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 17.8% |
| SciCode | — | 53.2% |
Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 35.9 (#40), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.4 (#14)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 63.3% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 57.1% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 55.1% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 23.2% |
Reasoning Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 18.3 (#283), Qwen3.8 Max: 54.4 (#26)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1326 | 1496 |
| DTBench | 61.3% | 92% |
| LMCA | 10.3% | 46.2% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 28.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 88.3% |
| CritPt | — | 20% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 40% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 38% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 156.41 |
Math Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 36.2 (#171), Qwen3.8 Max: 73.2 (#20)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1300 | 1499 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 58% |
Knowledge Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 37.1 (#159), Qwen3.8 Max: 61.7 (#27)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1295 | 1507 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 92.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 47.3% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 9.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command A: —, Qwen3.8 Max: 37.2 (#75)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1314 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 20% |
Multilingual Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 45.3 (#170), Qwen3.8 Max: 56.7 (#18)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1313 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1327 | 1538 |
| LMArena French | 1351 | 1503 |
| LMArena German | 1341 | 1483 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1285 | 1467 |
| LMArena Korean | 1285 | 1461 |
| LMArena Russian | 1314 | 1481 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1347 | 1492 |
Instruction Following Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 69.1 (#177), Qwen3.8 Max: 77.6 (#17)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1309 | 1479 |
Long Context Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 40.6 (#151), Qwen3.8 Max: 45.6 (#31)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1334 | 1489 |
Writing & Preference Qwen3.8 Max leads
Command A: 47.6 (#208), Qwen3.8 Max: 67.1 (#30)
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen3.8 Max |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1331 | 1483 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1319 | 1479 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1339 | 1489 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1145 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command A better than Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is the stronger model overall, scoring 56.8 to 36.5 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Command A or Qwen3.8 Max?
Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Command A lists at $2.50 and $10.
Is Command A or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?
Qwen3.8 Max scores higher on coding benchmarks: 53.5 versus 27.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.8 Max does, with 1M tokens against 256K.
How many benchmarks do Command A and Qwen3.8 Max share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command A has 24 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Max has 39.