Model Comparison
Command A
vs. Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Cohere, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
39.9 reasoning / $0.37/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
$0.11/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
39.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Command A
9.9 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) is 22.7x cheaper on input tokens than Command A.
Speed gap
Command A generates about 1.1x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 8B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) leads Command A by 13.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Command A leads Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) by 0.9 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Command A
Cohere
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Co Command A | Top Pick Al Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $2.50/1M | $0.11/1M |
| Output Cost | $10.00/1M | $1.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.38/1M | $0.37/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Cohere | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Mar 13, 2025 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 66.9 tok/s | 61.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 343ms | 1389ms |
| Latency | 343ms | 34069ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 5.7 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 26.9 | 39.9 |
| Intelligence | 13.5 | 13.2 |
| Coding | 9.9 | 9.0 |
| Math | 13.0 | 19.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 52.7% | 58.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 71.2% | 74.3% |
| HLE | 4.6% | 4.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 28.7% | 40.6% |
| MATH 500 | 81.9% | 90.4% |
| AIME 2025 | 13.0% | 19.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 9.7% | 74.7% |
| SciCode | 28.1% | 22.6% |
| LCR | 18.0% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 36.5% | 33.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 15.2% | 27.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.8% | 2.3% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.11/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 39.9 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Command A reaches a 9.9 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Command A
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 8B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
