Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A+ vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Command A+Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
6.9
Output $/M
$0.08
vs $1.50 vs $0.08 per 1M output tokens. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct is 18.8x cheaper.

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Command A+ has the edge where the context window is larger, 192K against 131K tokens.

Shared results
0
Command A+ only
0
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
50
Like-for-like categories
0 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Command A+ not benchmarked, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
No category has a result for both models.
Widest single gap
No benchmark has a result for both models.
Output price
Command A+ $1.50 against Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 per million output tokens, 18.8x apart.
Context window
Command A+ takes 192K tokens, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index6 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured5.4Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured11.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured0.8%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
WeirdMLNot measured1.7%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1195Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1195Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured6.9Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured116.5Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured16.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured15.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured5.3%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured27.0%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1175Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1144Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1196Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured4.3Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.3%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured1.7%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured22.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8KNot measured82.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1179Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1180Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured47.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured56.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1193Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1182Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1206Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1166Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
IFBenchNot measured28.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured18.0%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
DTBenchNot measured50.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured5.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
PIQANot measured81.2%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1187Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1159Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1154Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1218Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1148Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1151Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1144Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1061Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1053Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1178Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1169Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1158Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1172Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1181Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1162Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1145Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Command A+$0.0010Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A+$0.019Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A+$0.075Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Command A+ and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
SpecificationCohere Command A+Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
MakerCohereMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026July 23, 2024
Context window192K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.05
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command A+ better than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Command A+ has the edge where the context window is larger, 192K against 131K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Command A+ or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Command A+ costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 and $0.08. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A+ or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Command A+, with 192K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Command A+ vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct comparison based on?

0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A+'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next