Model comparison
Command R vs Qwen1.5-7B
Command R and Qwen1.5-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.4 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Cohere
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Command R scores higher in 5 categories and Qwen1.5-7B in 3 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Command R leads 38.2 to 29.6.
Side by side
| Command R | Qwen1.5-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Cohere | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 31.4 | 31.4 |
| Released | 2024-08-30 | 2024-02-04 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 128K | — |
| Max output | 4K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.15 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.60 | — |
| Results tracked | 29 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Qwen1.5-7B leads
Command R: 29.3 (#306), Qwen1.5-7B: 32.2 (#276)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1169 | 1107 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 37.1% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | 17.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 45.2% | — |
Reasoning Qwen1.5-7B leads
Command R: 13.8 (#331), Qwen1.5-7B: 20.4 (#240)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1164 | 1065 |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 21.9% | — |
| DTBench | 46.4% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 33.3% | — |
| LMCA | 9.2% | — |
| LiveBench | 27.5% | — |
Math Qwen1.5-7B leads
Command R: 28.0 (#246), Qwen1.5-7B: 31.4 (#224)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1155 | 1080 |
| LiveBench Math | 19.4% | — |
Knowledge Command R leads
Command R: 31.0 (#221), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.7 (#243)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1138 | 1055 |
| MMLU | 65.2% | 62.6% |
Multilingual Command R leads
Command R: 35.7 (#245), Qwen1.5-7B: 28.5 (#271)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1174 | 1058 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1182 | 1141 |
| LMArena Russian | 1174 | 1006 |
| LMArena French | 1162 | — |
| LMArena German | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1143 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1163 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1151 | — |
Instruction Following Command R leads
Command R: 58.1 (#261), Qwen1.5-7B: 54.1 (#281)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1167 | 1058 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 55.6% | — |
Long Context Command R leads
Command R: 36.3 (#231), Qwen1.5-7B: 33.1 (#266)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1198 | 1090 |
Writing & Preference Command R leads
Command R: 38.2 (#254), Qwen1.5-7B: 29.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | Command R | Qwen1.5-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1083 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1170 | 1035 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1163 | 1062 |
| LiveBench Language | 16.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Command R better than Qwen1.5-7B?
Command R and Qwen1.5-7B score almost the same on the Noometry Index (31.4 vs 31.4), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Is Command R or Qwen1.5-7B better for coding?
Qwen1.5-7B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 32.2 versus 29.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Command R and Qwen1.5-7B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R has 29 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-7B has 13.