Model Comparison

Command R+ vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Command R+ significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 4.9x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

6 benchmarks

Command R+ outperforms in 5 benchmarks (ARC-C, HellaSwag, MMLU, TruthfulQA, Winogrande), while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is better at 1 benchmark (GSM8k).

Command R+ significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Command R+ ($0.25/1M tokens) is 2.8x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

For output processing, Command R+ ($1.00/1M tokens) is 11.1x more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Command R+ is more expensive than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Command R+

Input tokens$0.25

Output tokens$1.00

Best providerCohere

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Input tokens$0.09

Output tokens$0.09

Best providerLambda

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

72.0B diff

Command R+ has 72.0B more parameters than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct, making it 225.0% larger.

Command R+

104.0Bparameters

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

32.0Bparameters

104.0B

Command R+

32.0B

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.

Command R+

Input128,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Input128,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Command R+ is licensed under CC BY-NC, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Command R+

CC BY-NC

Open weights

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Command R+ was released on 2024-08-30, while Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct was released on 2024-09-19.

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 1 month newer than Command R+.

Command R+

Aug 30, 2024

1.6 years ago

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Sep 19, 2024

1.5 years ago

2w newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Command R+ is available from Cohere, Bedrock. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is available from Lambda, DeepInfra, Hyperbolic, Fireworks.

Command R+

Cohere

Input Price:Input: $0.25/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M

AWS Bedrock

Input Price:Input: $3.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $15.00/1M

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Lambda

Input Price:Input: $0.09/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.09/1M

Deepinfra

Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M

Hyperbolic

Input Price:Input: $0.20/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M

Fireworks

Input Price:Input: $0.89/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.89/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Command R+

View details

Cohere

Higher ARC-C score (71.0% vs 70.5%)

Higher HellaSwag score (88.6% vs 83.0%)

Higher MMLU score (75.7% vs 75.1%)

Higher TruthfulQA score (56.3% vs 54.2%)

Higher Winogrande score (85.4% vs 80.8%)

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

View details

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team

Less expensive input tokens

Less expensive output tokens

Higher GSM8k score (91.1% vs 70.7%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature	Command R+	Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Command R+ vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Command R+ significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Command R+ is made by Cohere and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

Command R+ scores HellaSwag: 88.6%, Winogrande: 85.4%, MMLU: 75.7%, ARC-C: 71.0%, GSM8k: 70.7%. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct scores HumanEval: 92.7%, GSM8k: 91.1%, MBPP: 90.2%, HellaSwag: 83.0%, Winogrande: 80.8%.

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is 2.8x cheaper for input tokens. Command R+ costs $0.25/M input and $1.00/M output via cohere. Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct costs $0.09/M input and $0.09/M output via lambda.

Command R+ supports 128K tokens and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

Key differences include input pricing ($0.25 vs $0.09/M), licensing (CC BY-NC vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Command R+ is developed by Cohere and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Command R+ vs Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Performance Benchmarks

Arena Performance

Pricing Analysis

Model Size

Context Window

License

Release Timeline

Knowledge Cutoff

Provider Availability

Command R+

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Outputs Comparison

Key Takeaways

Command R+

Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct

Detailed Comparison

FAQ

Which is better, Command R+ or Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

How does Command R+ compare to Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct in benchmarks?

Is Command R+ cheaper than Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the context window sizes for Command R+ and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

What are the main differences between Command R+ and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?

Who makes Command R+ and Qwen2.5-Coder 32B Instruct?