Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Command R+ vs Command R

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

GetInfoUs 연구팀 검토 완료최종 검토일: October 2026편집 정책
공유
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Command R+ vs Command R: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Command R+ by Cohere and Command R 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 R holds a notable pricing advantage for token ingestion. On output generation, Command R 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 R 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.

1:1 모델 맞대결 비교 (VS)

원하는 AI 모델 선택 및 실시간 비교

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 R+

오픈 웨이트 모델

Cohere의 Command R+ 모델은 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $2.5/1M 토큰, 출력 $10/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index48 / 100
Input Token:

$2.50 / 1M

Output Token:

$10.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

41.5%

Cohere

Command R

오픈 웨이트 모델

Cohere의 Command R 모델은 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $0.15/1M 토큰, 출력 $0.6/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index43 / 100
Input Token:

$0.15 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.60 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

32%

한눈에 보는 핵심 차이점

  • Command R is 16.5x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Command R is faster at 85 tok/s vs 65 tok/s.
  • Command R+ leads on SWE-bench coding (41.5% vs 32.0%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureCommand R+Command R
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
4843
Provider
CohereCohere
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$2.50 / 1M$0.15 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$10.00 / 1M$0.60 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$2.02 / 1M$0.13 / 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
8K4K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
65 tok/s85 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
41.5%32%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
56.5%46%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.75 / 1M$0.05 / 1M

부문별 우위 모델

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Command R+
+9.5% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Command R
16.5x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Command R
+31% faster generation
Context
Tied
128K tokens window

검증된 벤치마크 점수 비교

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

Command R+Command R
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

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

41.5%vs32%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

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

56.5%vs46%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

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

78.5%vs71%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

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

1300ptsvs1240pts
Terminal-Bench (Agentic Coding & Terminal Use)

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

36%vs28%
AIME (Advanced Math Competition)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.

66%vs52%
Long-Context Reasoning

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

80%vs75%
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

65 tok/s vs85 tok/s

지연 시간(Latency) 및 응답 속도

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 R+0.58s
Command R0.42s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Command R+8.27s
Command R6.30s

실시간 API 토큰 비용 시뮬레이터

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 R+ Monthly API Bill
$13.88 / month
$2.5/1M in · $10/1M out
Command R Monthly API Bill
$0.84 / month
$0.15/1M in · $0.6/1M out
Command R saves approximately $13.04 / month (94%) under this workload.16.5x Savings

Command R+ · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Cohere의 첨단 Enterprise-Grade Dense Transformer 아키텍처와 최대 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $2.5/1M, 출력 $10/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Command R · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Cohere의 첨단 Retrieval-Augmented Dense Transformer 아키텍처와 최대 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $0.15/1M, 출력 $0.6/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Token Use & Task Economics

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

MetricCommand R+Command R
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.65$0.12
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
35K25K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

기술 사양 (Specifications)

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureCommand R+Command R
Official API Model ID (SDK)command-r-pluscommand-r
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2024-082024-08
Knowledge CutoffJune 2024June 2024
ArchitectureEnterprise-Grade Dense TransformerRetrieval-Augmented Dense Transformer
Parameters104B35B
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 windowFlat rate ($0.15/1M in) across full 128K window
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLCached input at $0.75/1M tokensCached input at $0.05/1M 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) · 64 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 224 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 22 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 75 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 R+ vs Command R: 핵심 요약 문답 (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Command R+ or Command R?

Command R+ is more intelligent. It scores 48 compared with 43 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Command R is faster, generating 85 tokens per second compared with 65 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Command R is cheaper at $0.13 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $2.02 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Command R has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.42s compared with 0.58s.

종합 평가

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Command R+ if your priority is Enterprise knowledge hubs, mission-critical legal document search, and corporate workflows. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Command R if your workflow prioritizes Enterprise RAG search, document question answering, and customer support with citations. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

자주 묻는 질문 (FAQ)

How does Command R+ compare to Command R in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Command R+ costs $2.50 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 per 1M output tokens, whereas Command R costs $0.15 input and $0.60 output. Overall, Command R 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 R+ or Command R?+

Both Command R+ and Command R 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 R+ or Command R?+

Command R+ scores 41.5% on SWE-bench Verified while Command R scores 32%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Command R+ holds the verified benchmark lead.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Command R+ and Command R?+

Command R+ is optimized for low-latency direct generation. In contrast, Command R focuses on standard fast inference.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Command R+ and Command R?+

Command R+ generates approximately 65 tokens per second, while Command R delivers 85 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Command R provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Command R+ and Command R to optimize costs?+

Yes! High-efficiency architectures route high-frequency routine classification and conversational tasks to Command R to save operational costs, and dynamically escalate complex architectural queries or reasoning tasks to Command R+. 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.

공식 출처: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs