Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Command R7B vs Aya Expanse 32B

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Reviewed by the GetInfoUs research teamLast reviewed: October 2026Editorial policy
Share
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Command R7B vs Aya Expanse 32B: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Command R7B by Cohere and Aya Expanse 32B by Cohere represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, Command R7B holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Command R7B is more economical per million generated tokens. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, both models provide an identical memory horizon with 128K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Command R7B leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

Head-to-Head Comparison

Switch & Compare Any Models

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

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Cohere

Command R7B

Small RAG

Lightweight 7B parameter retrieval engine bringing Cohere citation grounding and 128K context to single-GPU edge servers.

Intelligence Index38 / 100
Input Token:

$0.07 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.20 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

27%

Cohere

Aya Expanse 32B

Multilingual 32B

High-capacity 32B multilingual model delivering superior performance across 23 global languages with rich nuance and 128K context.

Intelligence Index44 / 100
Input Token:

$0.25 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.50 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

33.5%

Key Differences at a Glance

  • Command R7B is 2.9x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Command R7B is faster at 140 tok/s vs 85 tok/s.
  • Aya Expanse 32B leads on SWE-bench coding (33.5% vs 27.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureCommand R7BAya Expanse 32B
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
3844
Provider
CohereCohere
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.07 / 1M$0.25 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.20 / 1M$0.50 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.05 / 1M$0.14 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
4K8K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
140 tok/s85 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
27%33.5%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
42.5%50%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.02 / 1M$0.06 / 1M

Who Wins Where?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Aya Expanse 32B
+6.5% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Command R7B
2.9x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Command R7B
+65% faster generation
Context
Tied
128K tokens window

Empirical Head-to-Head Benchmark Scores

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

Command R7BAya Expanse 32B
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

27%vs33.5%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

42.5%vs50%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

66%vs73%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1215ptsvs1265pts
Long-Context Reasoning

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

68%vs72%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

140 tok/s vs85 tok/s

Latency & Response Time

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 R7B0.29s
Aya Expanse 32B0.44s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Command R7B3.86s
Aya Expanse 32B6.32s

Real-Time Interactive Token Cost Simulator

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

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Command R7B Monthly API Bill
$0.32 / month
$0.07/1M in · $0.2/1M out
Aya Expanse 32B Monthly API Bill
$0.92 / month
$0.25/1M in · $0.5/1M out
Command R7B saves approximately $0.60 / month (66%) under this workload.2.9x Savings

Command R7B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Remarkable 128K context RAG performance in an ultra-compact 7B size
  • High inference velocity of 140 tokens/sec on single GPU cards
  • Built-in verifiable citation extraction and tool use
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Reduced reasoning capacity compared to Command R and R+
  • Text-only without native multimodal capabilities

Aya Expanse 32B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Substantially higher reasoning and factual accuracy in non-English languages
  • Generous 128K context window for long multilingual document translation
  • Open weights under permissive license for global researchers and enterprises
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Slightly lower coding benchmarks than English-centric 32B peers
  • Requires substantial GPU VRAM for multi-turn local serving

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricCommand R7BAya Expanse 32B
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.05$0.18
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
20K28K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

Technical Specifications

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureCommand R7BAya Expanse 32B
Official API Model ID (SDK)command-r7baya-expanse-32b
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2024-122024-10
Knowledge CutoffOctober 2024August 2024
ArchitectureEfficient Compact RAG TransformerHigh-Capacity Multilingual Transformer
Parameters7B32B
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Flat rate ($0.07/1M in) across full 128K windowFlat rate ($0.25/1M in) across full 128K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.02/1M tokensCached input at $0.06/1M tokens
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / 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 CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox toolsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull 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 BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token)Text BPE (~4 chars/token)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 4 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 15 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 20 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 69 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-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 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestexttext
Output Modalitiestexttext

Command R7B vs Aya Expanse 32B: Quick Answers

Which is more intelligent, Command R7B or Aya Expanse 32B?

Aya Expanse 32B is more intelligent. It scores 44 compared with 38 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Command R7B is faster, generating 140 tokens per second compared with 85 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Command R7B is cheaper at $0.05 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.14 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Command R7B has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.29s compared with 0.44s.

Verdict

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Command R7B if your priority is Edge RAG applications, local legal search, and budget-constrained API pipelines. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Aya Expanse 32B if your workflow prioritizes Global enterprise communications, international legal translation, and academic research. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

Frequently asked questions

How does Command R7B compare to Aya Expanse 32B in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Command R7B costs $0.07 per 1M input tokens and $0.20 per 1M output tokens, whereas Aya Expanse 32B costs $0.25 input and $0.50 output. Overall, Command R7B is the more cost-effective model for high-volume API pipelines. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.

Which model has a larger context window: Command R7B or Aya Expanse 32B?+

Both Command R7B and Aya Expanse 32B offer an identical context window of 128K tokens (~96k words). Both architectures provide equal capacity for large document ingestion, multi-file codebases, and extended multi-turn conversation histories.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Command R7B or Aya Expanse 32B?+

Command R7B scores 27% on SWE-bench Verified while Aya Expanse 32B scores 33.5%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Aya Expanse 32B holds the verified benchmark lead.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Command R7B and Aya Expanse 32B?+

Command R7B is optimized for low-latency direct generation. In contrast, Aya Expanse 32B focuses on standard fast inference.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Command R7B and Aya Expanse 32B?+

Command R7B generates approximately 140 tokens per second, while Aya Expanse 32B delivers 85 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Command R7B provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Command R7B and Aya Expanse 32B to optimize costs?+

Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to Command R7B to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Aya Expanse 32B. This tiered routing pattern cuts overall API bills by up to 70%.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

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

Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.

Sources: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs