Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Command A Translate vs Command A Vision

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Geprüft vom GetInfoUs-ForschungsteamZuletzt geprüft: October 2026Redaktionelle Richtlinien

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Command A TranslateProfile

Command A VisionProfile

Multi-Model Arena Stack:

5-Model Matrix Workbench

Popular Matchups:

Cohere

Command A Translate

Kompaktes Effizienz-Modell

Command A Translate von Cohere ist ein KI-Modell für maximale Kosteneffizienz pro Token und ressourcenschonende Produktions-Workloads mit 8K Kontextfenster, 130 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 40/100 und $0.2/$0.4 pro 1M Toke

Intelligence Index40 / 100

Input Token:

$0.20 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.40 / 1M

Context Window:

8.2K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Cohere

Command A Vision

Nativ Multimodale KI

Command A Vision von Cohere ist ein KI-Modell für nativ multimodale Verarbeitung von Text und Bild sowie visuelle Dokumentenanalyse mit 128K Kontextfenster, 65 Token/s Durchsatz, einem Intelligenz-Index von 53/100 und $2.5/$10 pro 1M Token.

Intelligence Index53 / 100

Input Token:

$2.50 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

45%

Wichtigste Unterschiede auf einen Blick

Command A Translate is 18.9x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
Command A Vision has a larger context window (128K vs 8K tokens).
Command A Translate is faster at 130 tok/s vs 65 tok/s.

Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →

Feature	Command A Translate	Command A Vision
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)	40	53
Provider	Cohere	Cohere
Input Price Cost per million input tokens	$0.20 / 1M	$2.50 / 1M
Output Price Cost per million output tokens	$0.40 / 1M	$10.00 / 1M
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M	$0.11 / 1M	$2.02 / 1M
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens	8.2K tokens~12 A4 pages of text	128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens Per single request	4K	16K
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second	130 tok/s	65 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering	N/A	45%
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning	N/A	62.5%
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens	$0.05 / 1M	$0.75 / 1M

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

At-a-glance decision framework

Coding

Evaluations ongoing

Cost

Command A Translate

18.9x cheaper monthly runtime

Speed

Command A Translate

+100% faster generation

Context

Command A Vision

128K tokens window

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Command A TranslateCommand A Vision

SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

N/Avs45%

GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

N/Avs62.5%

MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

68%vs81.5%

LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1235ptsvs1345pts

Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.

N/Avs41%

Long-Context Reasoning

Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.

N/Avs83%

Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

130 tok/s vs65 tok/s

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better

Command A Translate0.32s

Command A Vision0.55s

Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time

Command A Translate4.17s

Command A Vision8.24s

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

Daily Input Tokens100K / day

10K500K1M

Daily Output Tokens30K / day

5K150K300K

Prompt Cache Hit Ratio50% cached

0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)

Command A Translate Monthly API Bill

$0.74 / month

$0.2/1M in · $0.4/1M out

Command A Vision Monthly API Bill

$13.88 / month

$2.5/1M in · $10/1M out

Command A Translate saves approximately $13.14 / month (95%) under this workload.18.9x Savings

Command A Translate · Strengths & Key Advantages

8K Kontextfenster und bis zu 4K maximale Output-Token (MMLU-Pro 68% · Arena Elo 1235)
Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 130 Token/Sekunde bei nur 320 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
Offene Modellgewichte (Confidential (~14B)) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama

Considerations & Trade-offs

Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
Bei extrem komplexen mehrstufigen Forschungsfragen bieten schwere Reasoning-Spezialmodelle noch tiefere Analysen

Command A Vision · Strengths & Key Advantages

128K Kontextfenster und bis zu 16K maximale Output-Token (SWE-bench Verified 45% · GPQA Diamond 62.5%)
Hohe Generierungsgeschwindigkeit von 65 Token/Sekunde bei nur 550 ms Erstlatenz (TTFT)
Offene Modellgewichte (Confidential (~110B+)) für lokales Self-Hosting und Fine-Tuning über vLLM, SGLang oder Ollama

Considerations & Trade-offs

Erfordert dedizierte GPU-Hardware mit ausreichend VRAM für den lokalen Betrieb in voller Präzision
Bei hohem Anfragevolumen empfiehlt sich der Einsatz von Prompt-Caching und Batch-API zur Kostenoptimierung

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

Metric	Command A Translate	Command A Vision
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task	$0.04	$0.80
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task	15K	38K
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task	0K	0K

Technische Spezifikationen

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

Feature	Command A Translate	Command A Vision
Official API Model ID (SDK)	command-a-translate	command-a-vision
API Protocol	OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI	OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date	2025-08	2025-07
Knowledge Cutoff	June 2025	May 2025
Architecture	Specialized Enterprise Neural Translation Transformer	Enterprise Multimodal Agent Transformer
Parameters	Confidential (~14B)	Confidential (~110B+)
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)	Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud	Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)	Flat rate ($0.2/1M in) across full 8K window	Flat rate ($2.5/1M in) across full 128K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTL	Cached input at $0.05/1M tokens	Cached input at $0.75/1M tokens
Computer Use / GUI Agent	API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)	API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool Calling	Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema	Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & Sandbox	Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools	Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning Support	Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)	Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token Billing	Text BPE (~4 chars/token)	Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAM	BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 9 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 30 GB VRAM (Native BF16)	BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 68 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 237 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier Classification	Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)	Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)	100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control	100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalities	text	text, vision
Output Modalities	text	text

Command A Translate vs Command A Vision: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Command A Translate or Command A Vision?

Command A Vision is more intelligent. It scores 53 compared with 40 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Command A Translate is faster, generating 130 tokens per second compared with 65 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Command A Translate is cheaper at $0.11 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $2.02 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Command A Translate has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.32s compared with 0.55s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Command A Vision has a larger context window, supporting 128K tokens compared with 8.2K tokens.

Fazit

Sowohl Command A Translate (Optimal für maximale Kosteneffizienz pro Token und ressourcenschonende Produktions-Workloads, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) als auch Command A Vision (Optimal für nativ multimodale Verarbeitung von Text und Bild sowie visuelle Dokumentenanalyse, Enterprise-RAG-Systeme und skalierbare API-Pipelines.) überzeugen im Produktionseinsatz: Command A Vision führt bei komplexem Reasoning und Coding, Command A Translate liefert den höheren Token-Durchsatz und Command A Translate ist die kosteneffizienteste Wahl für große API-Workloads.

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Welches Modell ist besser für Coding und Reasoning – Command A Translate oder Command A Vision?+

Im Gesamt-Intelligenzindex und bei Software-Benchmarks liegt Command A Vision vorn. Prüfen Sie oben die SWE-bench- und GPQA-Werte für Ihren Anwendungsfall.

Wie unterscheiden sich die API-Preise von Command A Translate und Command A Vision?+

Command A Translate kostet $0.20 / $0.40 pro 1M Input-/Output-Tokens, Command A Vision liegt bei $2.50 / $10.00. Beim gewichteten Gesamtpreis ist Command A Translate günstiger.

Welches Modell hat das größere Kontextfenster und die höhere Geschwindigkeit?+

Command A Translate bietet 8.2K Tokens Kontext gegenüber 128K Tokens bei Command A Vision. Bei der Generierungsgeschwindigkeit liegt Command A Translate vorn.

AI Terminology & Guide

Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

Tokens & Pricing Context Window AI Benchmarks Reasoning Models Tool Calling Model Context Protocol (MCP)

Command A Translate vs Command A Vision

Beliebige Modelle wechseln & vergleichen

Command A Translate

Command A Vision

Wer gewinnt in welcher Disziplin?

Geprüfte Benchmark-Ergebnisse im Vergleich

Latenz & Antwortzeit

Interaktiver Token-Kosten-Simulator

Command A Translate · Strengths & Key Advantages

Considerations & Trade-offs

Command A Vision · Strengths & Key Advantages

Considerations & Trade-offs

Token Use & Task Economics

Technische Spezifikationen

Command A Translate vs Command A Vision: Schnelle Antworten (FAQ)

Fazit

Häufig gestellte Fragen (FAQ)

Related reading