Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A+ vs Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 costs 1.8x less per output token than Command A+ ($0.85 vs $1.50 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Command A+Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.50
S Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2Sao10K
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.85
vs $1.50 vs $0.85 per 1M output tokens. Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 is 1.8x cheaper.

Command A+ or Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2: which to pick

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

Pick Command A+ for a larger context window (192K against 131K tokens).

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them.

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 Euryale 70B v2.2 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 Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 $0.85 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
Command A+ takes 192K tokens, Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 131K.

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.

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 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.0013Fits in one request

Command A+ costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A+$0.019Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.045Fits in one request

Command A+ costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A+$0.075Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.178Exceeds 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 Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2
SpecificationCohere Command A+Sao10K Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2
MakerCohereSao10K
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 22, 2026August 28, 2024
Context window192K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.85
Output $/Mtok$1.50$0.85
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 Euryale 70B v2.2 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Command A+ for a larger context window (192K against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Command A+ or Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2?

Command A+ costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 costs $0.85 and $0.85. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A+ or Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2?

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

Has any benchmark tested both Command A+ and Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2?

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next