Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A vs GPT-4o-mini

Updated October 21, 2026. 20 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Command ACohere
Coding
No data
Overall
13.1
Output $/M
$10.00
16
GPT-4o-miniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
6.7
Output $/M
$0.60
4
vs boards won of 20 shared

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 128K tokens, and where what matters is MGSM (Vals AI) or AA Math Index, where it leads.

Shared results
20
Command A only
40
GPT-4o-mini only
7
Like-for-like categories
6 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, GPT-4o-mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 16.7 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
IFBench: Command A 73.9% against GPT-4o-mini 31.0%, 43.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command A $10.00 against GPT-4o-mini $0.60 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
Context window
Command A takes 256K tokens, GPT-4o-mini 128K.

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 ABarsGPT-4o-miniTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning30
Math23
Knowledge50
General21
All shared boards164
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
AA Coding Index27.811.4Command A
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)35.1%26.4%Command A
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%23.4%Command A
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: coding1330Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1336Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
AA Intelligence Index13.16.7Command A
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured126.5Only GPT-4o-mini measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
AA Agentic Index1.0Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)9.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
τ²-Bench Telecom80.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
GPQA Diamond48.5%44.2%Command A
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)76.1%42.6%Command A
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.0%4.2%Command A
ARC-AGI-2Not measured0.0%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1326Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: expert1296Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1335Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index23
Math benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
AIME13.3%11.5%Command A
MATH 500 (Vals AI)76.2%72.6%Command A
MGSM (Vals AI)85.7%86.2%GPT-4o-mini
AA Math Index13.014.7GPT-4o-mini
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%14.7%GPT-4o-mini
GSM8KNot measured91.3%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text: math1300Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1312Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
MMLU Pro69.2%62.7%Command A
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%45.5%Command A
TaxEval (Vals AI)61.4%60.5%Command A
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured54.5%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)80.5%72.4%Command A
MedCode (Vals AI)19.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)71.2%64.8%Command A
MMLUNot measured81.8%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text: science1339Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1334Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1348Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1315Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index21
General benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
IFBench73.9%31.0%Command A
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
DTBench61.3%54.4%Command A
LMCA10.3%10.4%GPT-4o-mini
PIQANot measured88.7%Only GPT-4o-mini measured
LMArena Text1331Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1309Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1319Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: English1344Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: non-English1313Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1327Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: German1342Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1285Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Korean1285Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: French1351Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1347Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Russian1314Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: Polish1324Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1338Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1334Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1328Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1306Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-miniLeader
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
GPT-4o-mini$0.0004Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A$0.155Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini$0.0093Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A$0.600Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini$0.036Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o-mini 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 GPT-4o-mini
SpecificationCohere Command AOpenAI GPT-4o-mini
MakerCohereOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025July 18, 2024
Context window256K128K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.15
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.60
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it10
Cost per solved task$2.69Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command A better than GPT-4o-mini 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 128K tokens, and where what matters is MGSM (Vals AI) or AA Math Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Command A or GPT-4o-mini?

Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o-mini costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for Command A only.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A or GPT-4o-mini?

Command A, with 256K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Command A vs GPT-4o-mini comparison based on?

20 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-4o-mini's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next