Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R (08-2024) vs GPT-5.4

Command R (08-2024) costs 25.0x less per output token than GPT-5.4 ($0.60 vs $15.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 25 benchmarks have a result for both.

Command R (08-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
GPT-5.4OpenAI
Coding
64.4
Overall
69.6
Output $/M
$15.00
25
vs boards won of 25 shared

Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.4: which to pick

Only GPT-5.4 has a coding score, 64.4 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 25.0x cheaper ($0.60 vs $15.00 per million).

Shared results
25
Command R (08-2024) only
0
GPT-5.4 only
85
Like-for-like categories
5 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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 R (08-2024) not benchmarked, GPT-5.4 64.4 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 50.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: expert: Command R (08-2024) 1173 against GPT-5.4 1507, 55.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command R (08-2024) $0.60 against GPT-5.4 $15.00 per million output tokens, 25.0x apart.
Context window
Command R (08-2024) takes 128K tokens, GPT-5.4 1.05M.

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 R (08-2024)BarsGPT-5.4Ties
Coding02
Reasoning03
Math02
Knowledge04
General014
All shared boards025
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1464Only GPT-5.4 measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured71.1Only GPT-5.4 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured84.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured78.2%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured67.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured35.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured51.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured57.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Terminal-BenchNot measured81.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GSO-BenchNot measured31.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
WeirdMLNot measured77.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MirrorCodeNot measured15.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ALE-BenchNot measured1607.0Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: coding11871496GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: software and IT11971491GPT-5.4
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1454Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1478Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1436Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured39.0Only GPT-5.4 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured157.3Only GPT-5.4 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1059Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1017Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1087Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1030Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot gamesNot measured1135Only GPT-5.4 measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured87.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured52.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
METR time horizonsNot measured74.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
DeepResearch BenchNot measured35.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
PostTrainBenchNot measured19.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$6,144Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
GPQA DiamondNot measured91.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)Not measured87.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured92.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured43.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured93.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGINot measured93.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured74.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured48.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured37.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
EBR-benchNot measured25.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11861485GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: expert11731507GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11941479GPT-5.4
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1327Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1336Only GPT-5.4 measured
Kagi LLM BenchmarkNot measured63.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
AIMENot measured96.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured97.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured78.6%Only GPT-5.4 measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured49.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
ProofBenchNot measured56.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: math11881488GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: mathematical work11981497GPT-5.4
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
MMLU ProNot measured87.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured86.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)Not measured63.8%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured65.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured74.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)Not measured68.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured96.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured41.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured45.1%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: science12521479GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12381458GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: legal and government12681486GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: business and finance12151474GPT-5.4
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 R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1199Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1215Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1195Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1196Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1066Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1180Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1142Only GPT-5.4 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1188Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
General benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured43.3%Only GPT-5.4 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured77.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
IFBenchNot measured73.9%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured82.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
DTBenchNot measured94.4%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMCANot measured52.0%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CL-benchNot measured27.9%Only GPT-5.4 measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured37.5%Only GPT-5.4 measured
CL-bench LifeNot measured21.7%Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text12291469GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: instruction following11971469GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: creative writing12341439GPT-5.4
LMArena VisionNot measured1303Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: English12381467GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: non-English12161465GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Chinese12271520GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: German12161472GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Japanese11661485GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: Korean11621449GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1493Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1452Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: Russian12271480GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1472Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12131482GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: longer queries12301473GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: writing and language12411458GPT-5.4
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12231438GPT-5.4
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1301Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1354Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1312Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1284Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing thingsNot measured1251Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1283Only GPT-5.4 measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1471Only GPT-5.4 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
BenchmarkCommand R (08-2024)GPT-5.4Leader
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 R (08-2024)$0.0004Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.010Fits in one request

Command R (08-2024) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.0093Fits in one request
GPT-5.4$0.170Fits in one request

Command R (08-2024) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R (08-2024)$0.036Exceeds the context window
GPT-5.4$0.650Fits in one request

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.

Specifications of Command R (08-2024) and GPT-5.4
SpecificationCohere Command R (08-2024)OpenAI GPT-5.4
MakerCohereOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 30, 2024March 5, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.15$2.50
Output $/Mtok$0.60$15.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked64.4
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computable$1.02
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command R (08-2024) better than GPT-5.4 for coding?

Only GPT-5.4 has a coding score, 64.4 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 25.0x cheaper ($0.60 vs $15.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.4?

Command R (08-2024) costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; GPT-5.4 costs $2.50 and $15.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Command R (08-2024) or GPT-5.4?

GPT-5.4, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Command R (08-2024) vs GPT-5.4 comparison based on?

25 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command R (08-2024)'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and GPT-5.4's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next