Command A vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- 13.1
- Output $/M
- $10.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $1.00
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
- 0
- Command A only
- 60
- Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct only
- 5
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Command A has a AA Intelligence Index result, 13.1.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Command A has a AA Agentic Index result, 1.0.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Command A has a GPQA Diamond result, 48.5%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Command A has a AIME result, 13.3%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Command A has a MMLU Pro result, 69.2%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Command A
Command A takes 256K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct
Command A $0.0075, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $0.0013 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Command A has the number, $2.69.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command A not benchmarked, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Command A $10.00 against Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct $1.00 per million output tokens, 10.0x apart.
- Context window
- Command A takes 256K tokens, Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 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.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | 27.8 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 35.1% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | 7.8% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | 17.6% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 28.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| SciCode | 38.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 25.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1330 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1336 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 13.1 | Not measured | Only 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
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | 1.0 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | 9.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 80.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| OSWorld | Not measured | 5.0% | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.1% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 12.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1326 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1296 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1335 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 13.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MATH 500 (Vals AI) | 76.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 85.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| AA Math Index | 13.0 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 13.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1300 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1312 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 69.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 79.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| CaseLaw (Vals AI) | 64.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 46.0% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 61.4% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 80.5% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 19.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 71.2% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| GeoBench | Not measured | 62.0% | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: science | 1339 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1348 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1315 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index25 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 55.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| IFBench | 73.9% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 52.7% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| DTBench | 61.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMCA | 10.3% | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text | 1331 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1309 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1319 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1107 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1344 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1313 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1327 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1342 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1285 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: French | 1351 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1347 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1314 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | 1324 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1338 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1334 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1328 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1306 | Not measured | Only Command A measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1115 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1107 | Only Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct | 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
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 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.
| Specification | Cohere Command A | Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | March 13, 2025 | February 1, 2025 |
| Context window | 256K | 128K |
| Input $/Mtok | $2.50 | $0.80 |
| Output $/Mtok | $10.00 | $1.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | $2.69 | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command A better than Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct 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 Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Command A costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct costs $0.80 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for Command A only.
Which has the bigger context window, Command A or Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct?
Command A, with 256K tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Command A vs Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command A's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen2.5 VL 72B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.