Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Command A Vision vs Gemma 3n

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

Verificato dal team di ricerca di GetInfoUsUltima verifica: October 2026Politica editoriale
Condividi
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Command A Vision vs Gemma 3n: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Command A Vision di Cohere e Gemma 3n di Google sono due modelli di IA di riferimento. Command A Vision offre una finestra di contesto di 128K token a $2.50/$10.00 per milione di token, mentre Gemma 3n mette a disposizione 32K token di contesto a $0.00/$0.00 per milione di token. Di seguito analizziamo benchmark, latenza e costi.

Confronto Diretto (VS)

Cambia e Confronta Qualsiasi Modello

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 A Vision

IA Multimodale Nativa

Command A Vision di Cohere è un modello di IA progettato per la comprensione multimodale nativa di testo e immagini e l’analisi visiva dei documenti, con finestra di contesto da 128K, velocità di 65 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 53/100

Intelligence Index53 / 100
Input Token:

$2.50 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

45%

Google

Gemma 3n

Modello Vocale e Audio Nativo

Gemma 3n di Google è un modello di IA progettato per la sintesi vocale naturale, l’elaborazione audio in tempo reale e la trascrizione, con finestra di contesto da 32K, velocità di 150 token/s, indice di intelligenza di 52/100 e tariffa di

Intelligence Index52 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

32K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

N/A

Differenze Chiave a Colpo d’Occhio

  • Gemma 3n is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Command A Vision has a larger context window (128K vs 32K tokens).
  • Gemma 3n is faster at 150 tok/s vs 65 tok/s.
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureCommand A VisionGemma 3n
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
5352
Provider
CohereGoogle
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$2.50 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$10.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$2.02 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text32K tokens~48 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
16K4K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
65 tok/s150 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
45%N/A
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
62.5%N/A
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.75 / 1M$0.00 / 1M

Chi vince in ogni categoria?

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding

Evaluations ongoing

Cost
Gemma 3n
1.0x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Gemma 3n
+131% faster generation
Context
Command A Vision
128K tokens window

Punteggi Benchmark Verificati

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

Command A VisionGemma 3n
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

45%vsN/A
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

62.5%vsN/A
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

81.5%vs64%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1345ptsvs1220pts
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

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

41%vsN/A
Long-Context Reasoning

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

83%vsN/A
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

65 tok/s vs150 tok/s

Latenza e Tempo di Risposta

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 Vision0.55s
Gemma 3n0.22s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Command A Vision8.24s
Gemma 3n3.55s

Simulatore Interattivo dei Costi Token

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 A Vision Monthly API Bill
$13.88 / month
$2.5/1M in · $10/1M out
Gemma 3n Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Gemma 3n saves approximately $13.88 / month (100%) under this workload.1.0x Savings

Command A Vision · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 128K con capacità massima di output fino a 16K token (SWE-bench Verified 45% · GPQA Diamond 62.5%)
  • Throughput elevato di 65 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 550 ms
  • Pesi aperti (Confidential (~110B+)) pronti per il self-hosting locale o su cloud privato tramite vLLM, SGLang o Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Richiede server GPU dedicati con sufficiente memoria VRAM per l’esecuzione locale a piena precisione
  • Per volumi di traffico elevati in produzione si consiglia di attivare il prompt caching e la Batch API

Gemma 3n · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Finestra di contesto da 32K con capacità massima di output fino a 4K token (MMLU-Pro 64% · Arena Elo 1220)
  • Throughput elevato di 150 token/secondo con latenza al primo token (TTFT) di soli 220 ms
  • Pesi aperti (2B / 5B) pronti per il self-hosting locale o su cloud privato tramite vLLM, SGLang o Ollama
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • Richiede server GPU dedicati con sufficiente memoria VRAM per l’esecuzione locale a piena precisione
  • Nelle dimostrazioni scientifiche più estreme, i modelli di ragionamento pesante dedicati offrono maggiore profondità

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricCommand A VisionGemma 3n
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.80$0.00
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
38K3K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

Specifiche Tecniche

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureCommand A VisionGemma 3n
Official API Model ID (SDK)command-a-visionmodels/gemma-3n
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIGoogle Gemini API (generateContent) + OpenAI-Compatible SDK
Release Date2025-072025-06
Knowledge CutoffMay 2025March 2025
ArchitectureEnterprise Multimodal Agent TransformerEdge-optimized multimodal transformer with audio support
ParametersConfidential (~110B+)2B / 5B
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 ($2.5/1M in) across full 128K windowFree across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.75/1M tokensAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops)
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 toolsBuilt-in Google Search Grounding + Managed Python Code Execution Sandbox
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) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile)Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) · Audio (~25–32 tokens/sec)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 68 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 237 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 2 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 4 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Google DeepMind Frontier Safety Framework Verified
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 Modalitiestext, visiontext, vision, audio
Output Modalitiestexttext

Command A Vision vs Gemma 3n: Risposte Rapide (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Command A Vision or Gemma 3n?

Command A Vision is more intelligent. It scores 53 compared with 52 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Gemma 3n is faster, generating 150 tokens per second compared with 65 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Gemma 3n is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $2.02 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Gemma 3n has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.22s compared with 0.55s.

Which model has a larger context window?

Command A Vision has a larger context window, supporting 128K tokens compared with 32K tokens.

Verdetto

Sia Command A Vision (Ideale per la comprensione multimodale nativa di testo e immagini e l’analisi visiva dei documenti, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) sia Gemma 3n (Ideale per la sintesi vocale naturale, l’elaborazione audio in tempo reale e la trascrizione, sistemi RAG aziendali e integrazioni API scalabili.) eccellono in produzione: Command A Vision guida nei benchmark di ragionamento e programmazione, Gemma 3n garantisce una generazione più rapida e Gemma 3n offre il miglior rapporto qualità-prezzo per carichi API elevati.

Domande Frequenti (FAQ)

Quale modello è migliore per coding e ragionamento, Command A Vision o Gemma 3n?+

Nell’indice di intelligenza composito e nei benchmark di programmazione prevale Command A Vision. Consulta i punteggi SWE-bench e GPQA qui sopra per tutti i dettagli.

Qual è la differenza di prezzo API tra Command A Vision e Gemma 3n?+

Command A Vision costa $2.50 / $10.00 per milione di token di input/output, mentre Gemma 3n costa $0.00 / $0.00. Nel costo combinato, Gemma 3n risulta più economico.

Quale modello ha la finestra di contesto più ampia e la velocità maggiore?+

Command A Vision supporta 128K token di contesto contro 32K token di Gemma 3n, mentre Gemma 3n offre una velocità di generazione superiore.

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.

Fonti ufficiali: Documentazione API ufficiale di Cohere e Google, schede di sistema e benchmark indipendenti (2026).