Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A vs R1 0528

Updated October 21, 2026. 39 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Command A Replace R1 0528
Command ACohere
Coding
No data
Overall
13.1
Output $/M
$10.00
3
R1 0528DeepSeek
Coding
No data
Overall
13.1
Output $/M
$2.18
35
vs boards won of 39 shared, 1 tied

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, 256K against 164K tokens, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model ACommand ACohereNot benchmarked1 independent benchmark$2.69 per solved taskModel BR1 0528DeepSeekNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
39
Command A only
21
R1 0528 only
20
Like-for-like categories
7 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, R1 0528 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 44.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: Command A 13.0 against R1 0528 76.0, 63.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command A $10.00 against R1 0528 $2.18 per million output tokens, 4.6x apart.
Context window
Command A takes 256K tokens, R1 0528 164K.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryCommand ABarsR1 0528Ties
Coding13
Intelligence001 tie
Agentic work10
Reasoning05
Math04
Knowledge05
General118
All shared boards3351 tie
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13
Coding benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured71.4%Only R1 0528 measured
AA Coding Index27.8Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)35.1%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)7.8%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)17.6%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)28.7%77.0%R1 0528
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%15.9%Command A
WeirdMLNot measured41.6%Only R1 0528 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured804.1Only R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: coding13301427R1 0528
LMArena Text: software and IT13361435R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index00
Intelligence benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
AA Intelligence Index13.113.1Tie
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)9.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
τ²-Bench Telecom80.7%36.5%Command A
METR time horizonsNot measured53.8%Only R1 0528 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured35.1%Only R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
GPQA Diamond48.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)76.1%81.3%R1 0528
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.0%15.8%R1 0528
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured76.3%Only R1 0528 measured
ARC-AGINot measured21.2%Only R1 0528 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured1.1%Only R1 0528 measured
SimpleBenchNot measured40.8%Only R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13261415R1 0528
LMArena Text: expert12961394R1 0528
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13351422R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
AIME13.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)76.2%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MGSM (Vals AI)85.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
AA Math Index13.076.0R1 0528
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%76.0%R1 0528
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured66.4%Only R1 0528 measured
MATH level 5Not measured96.6%Only R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text: math13001400R1 0528
LMArena Text: mathematical work13121415R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
MMLU Pro69.2%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)64.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)46.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)61.4%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MedQA (Vals AI)80.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MedCode (Vals AI)19.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)71.2%84.9%R1 0528
LMArena Text: science13391430R1 0528
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13341445R1 0528
LMArena Text: legal and government13481419R1 0528
LMArena Text: business and finance13151402R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1149Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1103Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1097Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1182Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1111Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1139Only R1 0528 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1039Only R1 0528 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index118
General benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
IFBench73.9%39.6%Command A
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%55.7%R1 0528
DTBench61.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMCA10.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured75.0%Only R1 0528 measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured81.9%Only R1 0528 measured
LMArena Text13311428R1 0528
LMArena Text: instruction following13091382R1 0528
LMArena Text: creative writing13191405R1 0528
LMArena Text: English13441437R1 0528
LMArena Text: non-English13131412R1 0528
LMArena Text: Chinese13271442R1 0528
LMArena Text: German13421404R1 0528
LMArena Text: Japanese12851391R1 0528
LMArena Text: Korean12851360R1 0528
LMArena Text: French13511417R1 0528
LMArena Text: Spanish13471411R1 0528
LMArena Text: Russian13141423R1 0528
LMArena Text: Polish13241428R1 0528
LMArena Text: multi-turn13381405R1 0528
LMArena Text: longer queries13341391R1 0528
LMArena Text: writing and language13281402R1 0528
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13061400R1 0528
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command A and R1 0528
BenchmarkCommand AR1 0528Leader
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$0.0075Fits in one request
R1 0528$0.0016Fits in one request

R1 0528 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A$0.155Fits in one request
R1 0528$0.032Fits in one request

R1 0528 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A$0.600Fits in one request
R1 0528$0.122Exceeds the context window

R1 0528 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 R1 0528
SpecificationCohere Command ADeepSeek R1 0528
MakerCohereDeepSeek
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025May 28, 2025
Context window256K164K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.50
Output $/Mtok$10.00$2.18
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$2.69Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command A better than R1 0528 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, 256K against 164K tokens, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Command A or R1 0528?

Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; R1 0528 costs $0.50 and $2.18. Cost per solved task is known for Command A only.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A or R1 0528?

Command A, with 256K tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks is the Command A vs R1 0528 comparison based on?

39 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and R1 0528's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next