Command R7B (12-2024) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Command R7B (12-2024) costs 2.7x less per output token than Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Command R7B (12-2024) for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million) and work measured by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL), where it leads.
- Shared results
- 1
- Command R7B (12-2024) only
- 0
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
- 29
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 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.
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 Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AA Intelligence Index result, 10.4.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a GPQA Diamond result, 70.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AIME result, 42.1%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a MMLU Pro result, 79.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Command R7B (12-2024)
Command R7B (12-2024) $0.0001, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command R7B (12-2024) not benchmarked, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 4.8 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL): Command R7B (12-2024) 32.1% against Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 36.9%, 4.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Command R7B (12-2024) $0.15 against Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
- Context window
- Command R7B (12-2024) takes 128K tokens, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 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.
| Category | Command R7B (12-2024) | Bars | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 1 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 71.4% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 59.3% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 4.5% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 10.4 | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 133.8 | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 19.0% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 32.1% | 36.9% | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 70.2% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.4% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 62.5% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 6.8% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | Not measured | 40.5% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | Not measured | 42.1% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | Not measured | 89.5% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 53.3 | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 53.3% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 79.1% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 82.0% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.6% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.2% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.6% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | Not measured | 88.9% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 34.2% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 75.9% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.8% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.8% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 49.9% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | Not measured | 55.7% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| DTBench | Not measured | 62.8% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 18.1% | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | 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
Command R7B (12-2024) costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Command R7B (12-2024) costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Command R7B (12-2024) 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 R7B (12-2024) | Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 14, 2024 | July 22, 2025 |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.0375 | $0.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command R7B (12-2024) better than Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Command R7B (12-2024) for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.40 per million) and work measured by Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite?
Command R7B (12-2024) costs $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks is the Command R7B (12-2024) vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite comparison based on?
1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Command R7B (12-2024)'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.