Model comparison
Command R vs GPT-6.1 Sol
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.
CohereSummary
- They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 0 categories and GPT-6.1 Sol in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 81.9 to 13.8.
- Command R is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.60 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Command R has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 65.6 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2026-09-29 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 4K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | $10 |
| Results tracked | 29 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1487 |
| DeepSWE | — | 75.2% |
| FrontierCode | — | 50.2% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1755 |
| SciCode | — | 55.8% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Command R: —, GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 60% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 32% |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1466 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 94.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 95.5% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 98.5% |
| CritPt | — | 31.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 61% |
| EBR-Bench | — | 54.3% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 80% |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 166.09 |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 28.0 (#246), GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1464 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 93.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 100% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | — | 100% |
| ProofBench | — | 99% |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1502 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 95.4% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 73.9% |
| MMLU | 65.2% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Command R: —, GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1288 |
| Furniture Assembly | — | 80% |
Multilingual GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1438 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1477 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1455 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | — |
| LMArena German | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | — |
Instruction Following GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1468 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1465 |
Writing & Preference GPT-6.1 Sol leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63)
| Benchmark | Command R | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1447 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1432 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1449 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index. Command R costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Command R or GPT-6.1 Sol?
Command R is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is Command R or GPT-6.1 Sol better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Command R and GPT-6.1 Sol share?
12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and GPT-6.1 Sol has 34.