Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command A vs MiniMax M2.7

Updated October 21, 2026. 51 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 MiniMax M2.7
Command ACohere
Coding
No data
Overall
13.1
Output $/M
$10.00
2
MiniMax M2.7MiniMax
Coding
36.2
Overall
22.8
Output $/M
$1.20
49
vs boards won of 51 shared

Decision reading

Only MiniMax M2.7 has a coding score, 36.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command A has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Command A has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 205K tokens, and where what matters is CaseLaw (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: Japanese, where it leads.

Model ACommand ACohereNot benchmarked1 independent benchmark$2.69 per solved taskModel BMiniMax M2.7MiniMax36.2/1003 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved task
Shared results
51
Command A only
9
MiniMax M2.7 only
23
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, MiniMax M2.7 36.2 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Math, 39.6 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AIME: Command A 13.3% against MiniMax M2.7 91.0%, 77.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command A $10.00 against MiniMax M2.7 $1.20 per million output tokens, 8.3x apart.
Context window
Command A takes 256K tokens, MiniMax M2.7 205K.

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 ABarsMiniMax M2.7Ties
Coding08
Intelligence01
Agentic work03
Reasoning06
Math03
Knowledge19
General119
All shared boards249
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index08
Coding benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1399Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
AA Coding Index27.852.6MiniMax M2.7
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)35.1%79.9%MiniMax M2.7
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)7.8%73.8%MiniMax M2.7
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured11.9%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured8.7%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)17.6%48.7%MiniMax M2.7
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)28.7%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
SciCode38.5%50.1%MiniMax M2.7
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)25.0%39.4%MiniMax M2.7
Terminal-BenchNot measured45.1%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
WeirdMLNot measured37.0%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured599.3Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
LMArena Text: coding13301454MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: software and IT13361446MiniMax M2.7
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1388Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1401Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
AA Intelligence Index13.122.8MiniMax M2.7
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured145.8Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Agentic work benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
AA Agentic Index1.015.3MiniMax M2.7
Finance Agent (Vals AI)9.0%27.9%MiniMax M2.7
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured6.9%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured10.6%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured28.4%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom80.7%84.8%MiniMax M2.7
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
GPQA Diamond48.5%86.6%MiniMax M2.7
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)76.1%87.4%MiniMax M2.7
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.0%29.6%MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts13261422MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: expert12961443MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13351441MiniMax M2.7
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
AIME13.3%91.0%MiniMax M2.7
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
ProofBenchNot measured3.0%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
LMArena Text: math13001421MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: mathematical work13121437MiniMax M2.7
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19
Knowledge benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
MMLU Pro69.2%80.4%MiniMax M2.7
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.7%84.0%MiniMax M2.7
CaseLaw (Vals AI)64.5%60.9%Command A
CorpFin (Vals AI)46.0%61.2%MiniMax M2.7
TaxEval (Vals AI)61.4%66.6%MiniMax M2.7
MedQA (Vals AI)80.5%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
MedCode (Vals AI)19.7%34.4%MiniMax M2.7
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)71.2%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMArena Text: science13391416MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13341409MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: legal and government13481403MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: business and finance13151407MiniMax M2.7
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1243Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1210Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1209Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1233Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1195Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1233Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1137Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1136Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index119
General benchmarks for Command A and MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)55.7%79.9%MiniMax M2.7
IFBench73.9%75.7%MiniMax M2.7
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)52.7%78.3%MiniMax M2.7
DTBench61.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
LMCA10.3%Not measuredOnly Command A measured
ExploitBenchNot measured13.3%Only MiniMax M2.7 measured
LMArena Text13311405MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: instruction following13091405MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: creative writing13191354MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: English13441426MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: non-English13131382MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: Chinese13271442MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: German13421398MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: Japanese12851260Command A
LMArena Text: Korean12851314MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: French13511424MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: Spanish13471402MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: Russian13141383MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: Polish13241387MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: multi-turn13381412MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: longer queries13341418MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: writing and language13281376MiniMax M2.7
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13061360MiniMax M2.7
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 MiniMax M2.7
BenchmarkCommand AMiniMax M2.7Leader
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
MiniMax M2.7$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.7 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command A$0.155Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.7$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.7 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command A$0.600Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.7$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.7 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 MiniMax M2.7
SpecificationCohere Command AMiniMax M2.7
MakerCohereMiniMax
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025March 18, 2026
Context window256K205K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.30
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarked36.2
Independent measurements behind it13
Cost per solved task$2.69$0.64
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command A better than MiniMax M2.7 for coding?

Only MiniMax M2.7 has a coding score, 36.2 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command A has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Command A has the edge where the context window is larger, 256K against 205K tokens, and where what matters is CaseLaw (Vals AI) or LMArena Text: Japanese, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Command A or MiniMax M2.7?

Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.7 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, Command A costs $2.69 and MiniMax M2.7 $0.64.

Which has the bigger context window, Command A or MiniMax M2.7?

Command A, with 256K tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the Command A vs MiniMax M2.7 comparison based on?

51 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and MiniMax M2.7's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next