Noometry

Model comparison

Command R+ vs GLM-5V-Turbo

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.0

Rank #251 Confirmed

GLM-5V-Turbo Z.ai (Zhipu)

43.1

Rank #86 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 0 categories and GLM-5V-Turbo in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where GLM-5V-Turbo leads 28.5 to 8.9.
  • GLM-5V-Turbo is cheaper at $1.20 / $4 per million input/output tokens, against $2.50 / $10 for Command R+.
  • GLM-5V-Turbo accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R+ has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R+GLM-5V-Turbo
ProviderCohereZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index32.043.1
Released2024-08-302026-04-01
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K200K
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$2.50$1.20
Output $ / M tokens$10$4
Results tracked3419

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

Category by category

Coding GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 28.6 (#304), GLM-5V-Turbo: 41.8 (#105)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Coding11871467
LMArena WebDev—1400
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%—
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 8.9 (#341), GLM-5V-Turbo: 28.5 (#87)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Hard Prompts11861443
SimpleBench17.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.28—
LiveBench31.8%—

Math GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 26.6 (#239), GLM-5V-Turbo: 36.6 (#109)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Math11881440
LiveBench Math21.3%—

Knowledge GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 35.9 (#165), GLM-5V-Turbo: 39.9 (#113)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Expert11741451
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
MMLU69.4%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Command R+: —, GLM-5V-Turbo: 40.1 (#41)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Vision—1264
LMArena Document—1416

Multilingual GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 38.8 (#222), GLM-5V-Turbo: 53.2 (#69)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Non-English12161420
LMArena Chinese12261488
LMArena French12081443
LMArena German12161422
LMArena Korean11381399
LMArena Russian12271432
LMArena Spanish11891446
LMArena Japanese1166—

Instruction Following GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 60.2 (#249), GLM-5V-Turbo: 75.1 (#75)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Instruction Following11971422
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—

Long Context GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 37.3 (#214), GLM-5V-Turbo: 44.0 (#76)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Longer Query12311439

Writing & Preference GLM-5V-Turbo leads

Command R+: 43.7 (#223), GLM-5V-Turbo: 62.6 (#69)

BenchmarkCommand R+GLM-5V-Turbo
LMArena Text12291437
LMArena Creative Writing12351414
LMArena Multi-Turn12131432
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than GLM-5V-Turbo?

GLM-5V-Turbo is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ or GLM-5V-Turbo?

GLM-5V-Turbo is cheaper. It lists at $1.20 per million input tokens and $4 per million output tokens; Command R+ lists at $2.50 and $10.

Is Command R+ or GLM-5V-Turbo better for coding?

GLM-5V-Turbo scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.8 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GLM-5V-Turbo does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and GLM-5V-Turbo share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and GLM-5V-Turbo has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper