Model Comparison
Command-R (Mar '24)
vs. Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Cohere, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) 14 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
59.2 reasoning / $0.28/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
59.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
13.8 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 32B (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) is 2.6x cheaper on input tokens than Command-R (Mar '24).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) leads Command-R (Mar '24) by 47.7 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) wins 14 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Command-R (Mar '24)
Cohere
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Co Command-R (Mar '24) | Top Pick Al Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.50/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Output Cost | $1.50/1M | $0.52/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.75/1M | $0.28/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Cohere | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Mar 12, 2024 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 82.6 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1084ms |
| Latency | — | 25305ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 7.2 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 11.5 | 59.2 |
| Intelligence | 7.4 | 16.5 |
| Coding | — | 13.8 |
| Math | — | 73.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 28.4% | 66.8% |
| MMLU Pro | 33.8% | 79.8% |
| HLE | 4.8% | 8.3% |
| LiveCodeBench | 4.8% | 54.6% |
| MATH 500 | 16.4% | 96.1% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 73.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 0.7% | 80.7% |
| SciCode | 6.3% | 35.4% |
| LCR | — | 0.0% |
| IFBench | — | 36.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 29.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 3.0% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.20/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 59.2 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning) reaches a 13.8 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-R (Mar '24)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Qwen3 32B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
