Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A+ vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. No benchmark has tested both models yet. 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
Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
vs $1.50 vs $1.00 per 1M output tokens. Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct is 1.5x 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 128K tokens.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command A+ has none yet; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct on OSWorld, GeoBench and LMArena Vision. Compare them on price and context instead.

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, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Command A+ $1.50 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Command A+ takes 192K tokens, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 128K.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A+ and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
OSWorldNot measured5.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A+ and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
GeoBenchNot measured62.0%Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards measured
General benchmarks for Command A+ and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
BenchmarkCommand A+Qwen2.5 VL 72B InstructLeader
LMArena VisionNot measured1107Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1115Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1107Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 43 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
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.0013Fits in one request

Command A+ costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A+$0.019Fits in one request
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.043Fits in one request

Command A+ costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A+$0.075Exceeds the context window
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct$0.170Exceeds the context window

Command A+ 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 Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
SpecificationCohere Command A+Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
MakerCohereQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026February 1, 2025
Context window192K128K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.80
Output $/Mtok$1.50$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command A+ better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B 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 128K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Command A+ or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

Command A+ costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs $0.80 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A+ or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

Command A+, with 192K tokens against 128K.

Has any benchmark tested both Command A+ and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command A+ has none yet; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct on OSWorld, GeoBench and LMArena Vision. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next