Model comparison

Command R7B vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#51); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Command R7B Cohere

32.5

Unranked Sparse

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #51 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 30.8 to 26.1.
  • Command R7B is cheaper at $0.0375 / $0.15 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.1.
  • Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
  • Command R7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Command R7B and Muse Spark 1.1 specifications
Command R7BMuse Spark 1.1
ProviderCohereMeta
Noometry Index32.549.9
Released2024-12-022026-04-08
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K1.05M
Max output4K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.0375$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.15$4.25
Results tracked137

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
DeepSWE—53.3%
LMArena WebDev—1542
SciCode—58.8%
LMArena Coding—1498

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Command R7B: 26.1, Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
APEX-Agents—31.8%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard32.1%—
τ²-bench Banking—40.5%
GBAEval—7.9%
GDP.pdf—15%
Vending-Bench 2—6,520

Reasoning Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
NYT Connections (extended)—84.9%
CritPt—15.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1486
DTBench—94.4%
LMCA—49.9%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—154.21

Math Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
ProofBench—39%
LMArena Math—1483

Knowledge Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
SimpleQA Verified—57.8%
LMArena Expert—1478

Multimodal Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision—1293
LMArena Document—1465

Multilingual Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Non-English—1472
LMArena Chinese—1518
LMArena French—1494
LMArena German—1466
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Korean—1458
LMArena Russian—1483
LMArena Spanish—1464

Instruction Following Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Instruction Following—1457

Long Context Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Longer Query—1462

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Command R7B: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkCommand R7BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text—1479
LMArena Creative Writing—1437
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1927
EQ-Bench 4—1260
LMArena Multi-Turn—1485

Frequently asked questions

Is Command R7B better than Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#51); Command R7B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Command R7B or Muse Spark 1.1?

Command R7B is cheaper. It lists at $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Command R7B and Muse Spark 1.1 share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Command R7B has 1 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper