Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R7B (12-2024) vs Gemma 2 27B

Command R7B (12-2024) costs 4.3x less per output token than Gemma 2 27B ($0.15 vs $0.65 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Command R7B (12-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
Gemma 2 27BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.65
vs $0.15 vs $0.65 per 1M output tokens. Command R7B (12-2024) is 4.3x cheaper.

Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 2 27B: 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 4.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.65 per million) and a larger context window (128K against 8K tokens).

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R7B (12-2024) has results on Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL); Gemma 2 27B on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index. 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Command R7B (12-2024) not benchmarked, Gemma 2 27B not benchmarked.
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 R7B (12-2024) $0.15 against Gemma 2 27B $0.65 per million output tokens, 4.3x apart.
Context window
Command R7B (12-2024) takes 128K tokens, Gemma 2 27B 8K.

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 Index2 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1211Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1228Only Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured122.1Only Gemma 2 27B 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 measured
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)32.1%Not measuredOnly Command R7B (12-2024) measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured36.5%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1198Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1171Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1206Only Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards measured
Math benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured1.4%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
MATH level 5Not measured27.9%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1212Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1221Only Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured68.0%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
MMLUNot measured75.7%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1228Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1198Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1241Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1208Only Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19 boards measured
General benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 2 27BLeader
DTBenchNot measured48.0%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMCANot measured7.1%Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena TextNot measured1231Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1206Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1240Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1242Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1217Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1221Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1209Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1175Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1174Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1248Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1228Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1234Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1277Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1224Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1230Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1249Only Gemma 2 27B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1212Only Gemma 2 27B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 27 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)$0.0001Fits in one request
Gemma 2 27B$0.0010Fits in one request

Command R7B (12-2024) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Command R7B (12-2024)$0.0023Fits in one request
Gemma 2 27B$0.034Exceeds the context window

Command R7B (12-2024) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R7B (12-2024)$0.0090Exceeds the context window
Gemma 2 27B$0.137Exceeds the context window

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.

Specifications of Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B
SpecificationCohere Command R7B (12-2024)Google Gemma 2 27B
MakerCohereGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 14, 2024July 13, 2024
Context window128K8K
Input $/Mtok$0.0375$0.65
Output $/Mtok$0.15$0.65
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Command R7B (12-2024) better than Gemma 2 27B 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 4.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.65 per million) and a larger context window (128K against 8K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 2 27B?

Command R7B (12-2024) costs $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemma 2 27B costs $0.65 and $0.65. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 2 27B?

Command R7B (12-2024), with 128K tokens against 8K.

Has any benchmark tested both Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 2 27B?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R7B (12-2024) has results on Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL); Gemma 2 27B on LMArena Text: coding, LMArena Text: software and IT and Epoch Capabilities Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 21, 2026.

Compare next