Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A vs GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)

Updated October 21, 2026. 28 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
28
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 28 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.

Shared results
28
Command A only
32
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) only
18
Like-for-like categories
5 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 (2024-07-18) not benchmarked.
Widest category
Reasoning, 9.8 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: Korean: Command A 1285 against GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 1195, 15.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command A $10.00 against GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) $0.60 per million output tokens, 16.7x apart.
Context window
Command A takes 256K tokens, GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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-mini (2024-07-18)Ties
Coding20
Reasoning30
Math20
Knowledge40
General170
All shared boards280
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
Aider polyglotNot measured3.6%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
SciCode38.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
WeirdMLNot measured11.8%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: coding13301290Command A
LMArena Text: software and IT13361291Command A
Neither model has a result on the other 27 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
AA Intelligence Index13.1Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
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
BALROGNot measured17.4%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Reasoning benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
GPQA Diamond48.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)76.1%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured37.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
SimpleBenchNot measured10.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured3.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured12.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
VPCTNot measured34.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13261267Command A
LMArena Text: expert12961234Command A
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13351278Command A
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
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 Index13.0Not measuredOnly Command A measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)13.0%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured6.9%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured0.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
MATH level 5Not measured52.6%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: math13001267Command A
LMArena Text: mathematical work13121271Command A
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
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%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured8.3%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
MMLUNot measured76.7%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
GeoBenchNot measured64.0%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: science13391286Command A
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13341282Command A
LMArena Text: legal and government13481305Command A
LMArena Text: business and finance13151265Command A
Neither model has a result on the other 2 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 (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index170
General benchmarks for Command A and GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
IFBench73.9%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
DTBench61.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMCA10.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured67.2%Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text13311286Command A
LMArena Text: instruction following13091258Command A
LMArena Text: creative writing13191268Command A
LMArena VisionNot measured1066Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Text: English13441301Command A
LMArena Text: non-English13131266Command A
LMArena Text: Chinese13271265Command A
LMArena Text: German13421272Command A
LMArena Text: Japanese12851216Command A
LMArena Text: Korean12851195Command A
LMArena Text: French13511297Command A
LMArena Text: Spanish13471276Command A
LMArena Text: Russian13141275Command A
LMArena Text: Polish13241244Command A
LMArena Text: multi-turn13381285Command A
LMArena Text: longer queries13341289Command A
LMArena Text: writing and language13281282Command A
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13061253Command A
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1072Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1033Only GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 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 (2024-07-18)
BenchmarkCommand AGPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)Leader
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 (2024-07-18)$0.0004Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A$0.155Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.0093Fits in one request

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A$0.600Fits in one request
GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)$0.036Exceeds the context window

GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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 (2024-07-18)
SpecificationCohere Command AOpenAI GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)
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 (2024-07-18) 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.

Which is cheaper, Command A or GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18)?

Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) 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 (2024-07-18)?

Command A, with 256K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Command A vs GPT-4o-mini (2024-07-18) comparison based on?

28 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 (2024-07-18)'s on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next