Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R+ (08-2024) vs GLM 4.5V

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.

Command R+ (08-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
GLM 4.5VZ.ai
Coding
No data
Overall
7.6
Output $/M
$1.80
vs $10.00 vs $1.80 per 1M output tokens. GLM 4.5V is 5.6x cheaper.

Decision reading

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Command R+ (08-2024) has the edge where the context window is larger, 128K against 66K tokens.

Shared results
0
Command R+ (08-2024) only
0
GLM 4.5V only
40
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.

At a glance

Coding index
Command R+ (08-2024) not benchmarked, GLM 4.5V 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 R+ (08-2024) $10.00 against GLM 4.5V $1.80 per million output tokens, 5.6x apart.
Context window
Command R+ (08-2024) takes 128K tokens, GLM 4.5V 66K.

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 Index4 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured60.4%Only GLM 4.5V measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.8%Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1347Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1353Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured7.6Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured22.5%Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured68.4%Only GLM 4.5V measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured6.3%Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1335Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1353Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1357Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1151Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1163Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured73.0Only GLM 4.5V measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured73.0%Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1354Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1336Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured78.8%Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1330Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1349Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1338Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1309Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index18 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Command R+ (08-2024) and GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
IFBenchNot measured34.2%Only GLM 4.5V measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured0.0%Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena TextNot measured1333Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1311Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1294Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena VisionNot measured1154Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1362Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1303Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1337Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1336Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1298Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1302Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1333Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1305Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1302Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1303Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: EnglishNot measured1183Only GLM 4.5V measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1151Only GLM 4.5V measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 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 GLM 4.5V
BenchmarkCommand R+ (08-2024)GLM 4.5VLeader
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)$0.0075Fits in one request
GLM 4.5V$0.0015Fits in one request

GLM 4.5V costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command R+ (08-2024)$0.155Fits in one request
GLM 4.5V$0.035Fits in one request

GLM 4.5V costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R+ (08-2024)$0.600Exceeds the context window
GLM 4.5V$0.138Exceeds the context window

GLM 4.5V 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 GLM 4.5V
SpecificationCohere Command R+ (08-2024)Z.ai GLM 4.5V
MakerCohereZ.ai
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 30, 2024August 11, 2025
Context window128K66K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.60
Output $/Mtok$10.00$1.80
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command R+ (08-2024) better than GLM 4.5V for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Command R+ (08-2024) has the edge where the context window is larger, 128K against 66K tokens.

Which is cheaper, Command R+ (08-2024) or GLM 4.5V?

Command R+ (08-2024) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; GLM 4.5V costs $0.60 and $1.80. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command R+ (08-2024) or GLM 4.5V?

Command R+ (08-2024), with 128K tokens against 66K.

How many benchmarks is the Command R+ (08-2024) vs GLM 4.5V comparison based on?

0 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 GLM 4.5V's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next