Model comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen1.5-110B

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.

Command R+ Cohere

32.0

Rank #251 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.6

Rank #231 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R+ scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 4 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Qwen1.5-110B leads 21.7 to 8.9.

Side by side

Command R+ and Qwen1.5-110B specifications
Command R+Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderCohereAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index32.033.6
Released2024-08-302024-04-25
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$2.50—
Output $ / M tokens$10—
Results tracked3420

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen1.5-110B leads

Command R+: 28.6 (#304), Qwen1.5-110B: 32.4 (#260)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
BigCodeBench Instruct33.8%35%
LMArena Coding11871184
BigCodeBench Complete41.9%44.4%
LiveBench Coding19.1%—
HumanEval+56.7%—
MBPP+63.5%—

Reasoning Qwen1.5-110B leads

Command R+: 8.9 (#341), Qwen1.5-110B: 21.7 (#192)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts11861168
SimpleBench17.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning24.8%—
DTBench54.9%—
LiveBench Data Analysis38.1%—
LMCA5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index119.28—
ForecastBench—57.7
LiveBench31.8%—

Math Qwen1.5-110B leads

Command R+: 26.6 (#239), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.1 (#199)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math11881185
LiveBench Math21.3%—

Knowledge Command R+ leads

Command R+: 35.9 (#165), Qwen1.5-110B: 30.7 (#217)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert11741144
Vectara Hallucination Rate6.9%—
MMLU69.4%—

Multilingual Command R+ leads

Command R+: 38.8 (#222), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.8 (#245)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English12161142
LMArena Chinese12261206
LMArena French12081150
LMArena German12161123
LMArena Japanese11661074
LMArena Korean11381044
LMArena Russian12271118
LMArena Spanish11891141

Instruction Following Too close to call

Command R+: 60.2 (#249), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.6 (#247)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following11971158
LiveBench Instruction Following57.6%—

Long Context Command R+ leads

Command R+: 37.3 (#214), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.0 (#237)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query12311157

Writing & Preference Command R+ leads

Command R+: 43.7 (#223), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.1 (#250)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R+Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text12291175
LMArena Creative Writing12351148
LMArena Multi-Turn12131160
LiveBench Language29.7%—

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R+ better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Qwen1.5-110B is the stronger model overall, scoring 33.6 to 32.0 on the Noometry Index.

Is Command R+ or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Qwen1.5-110B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.4 versus 28.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Command R+ and Qwen1.5-110B share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R+ has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper