Command R (08-2024) vs GPT-5.2-Codex
Command R (08-2024) costs 23.3x less per output token than GPT-5.2-Codex ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.60
- Coding
- 45.4
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $14.00
Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.2-Codex: which to pick
Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command R (08-2024) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Command R (08-2024) for output tokens 23.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R (08-2024) has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and LMArena Text: hard prompts; GPT-5.2-Codex on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual and LMArena WebDev. Compare them on price and context instead.
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
Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, so no call is made.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a AA Intelligence Index result, 28.5.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
GPT-5.2-Codex
GPT-5.2-Codex takes 400K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Command R (08-2024)
Command R (08-2024) $0.0004, GPT-5.2-Codex $0.0088 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only GPT-5.2-Codex has the number, $0.43.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command R (08-2024) not benchmarked, GPT-5.2-Codex 45.4 from 3 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
- Widest single gap
- None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
- Output price
- Command R (08-2024) $0.60 against GPT-5.2-Codex $14.00 per million output tokens, 23.3x apart.
- Context window
- Command R (08-2024) takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.2-Codex 400K.
Benchmark by benchmark
Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | Not measured | 72.8% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | Not measured | 66.3% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LMArena WebDev | Not measured | 1339 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.0% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 72.4% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 37.9% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 37.1% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Terminal-Bench | Not measured | 66.5% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 1299.9 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1187 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1197 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | Not measured | 1329 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | Not measured | 1348 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 28.5 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1051 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | Not measured | 993 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | Not measured | 1090 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1176 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1142 | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 92.1% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 89.9% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 35.7% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1186 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1173 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1194 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: math | 1188 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1198 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text: science | 1252 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1238 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1268 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1215 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards measured
| Benchmark | Command R (08-2024) | GPT-5.2-Codex | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 77.6% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 82.3% | Only GPT-5.2-Codex measured |
| LMArena Text | 1229 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1197 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1234 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1238 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1216 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1227 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: German | 1216 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1166 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1162 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1227 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1213 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1230 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1241 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1223 | Not measured | Only Command R (08-2024) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 30 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 R (08-2024) costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Command R (08-2024) costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Command R (08-2024) 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 R (08-2024) | OpenAI GPT-5.2-Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | OpenAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | August 30, 2024 | January 14, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 400K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.15 | $1.75 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.60 | $14.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | 45.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 3 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $0.43 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command R (08-2024) better than GPT-5.2-Codex for coding?
Only GPT-5.2-Codex has a coding score, 45.4 on the Vibe Coding Index; Command R (08-2024) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Command R (08-2024) for output tokens 23.3x cheaper ($0.60 vs $14.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.2-Codex?
Command R (08-2024) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2-Codex costs $1.75 and $14.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.2-Codex only.
Which has the bigger context window, Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.2-Codex?
GPT-5.2-Codex, with 400K tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.2-Codex?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R (08-2024) has results on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and LMArena Text: hard prompts; GPT-5.2-Codex on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual and LMArena WebDev. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.