Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Command R7B (12-2024) vs Gemma 3 12B

Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B cost about the same per output token ($0.15 vs $0.1625 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

Command R7B (12-2024)Cohere
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.15
1
Gemma 3 12BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
28.0
Output $/M
$0.1625
0
vs boards won of 1 shared

Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 3 12B: 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 1.1x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.1625 per million).

Shared results
1
Command R7B (12-2024) only
0
Gemma 3 12B only
42
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.

At a glance

Coding index
Command R7B (12-2024) not benchmarked, Gemma 3 12B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 1.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL): Command R7B (12-2024) 32.1% against Gemma 3 12B 30.4%, 1.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Command R7B (12-2024) $0.15 against Gemma 3 12B $0.1625 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
Context window
Command R7B (12-2024) takes 128K tokens, Gemma 3 12B 131K.

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 R7B (12-2024)BarsGemma 3 12BTies
Agentic work10
All shared boards10
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index7 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured5.8Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured13.7%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCodeNot measured16.4%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured0.8%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1281Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1313Only Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCodeNot measured0.0%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured3.8Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured123.5Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured0.1Only Gemma 3 12B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured10.8%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)32.1%30.4%Command R7B (12-2024)
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured34.9%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.2%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured39.5%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1309Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1248Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1318Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured18.3Only Gemma 3 12B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured18.3%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured16.7%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1307Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1336Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured59.5%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1366Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1334Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1381Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1376Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
IFBenchNot measured36.7%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured8.3%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
DTBenchNot measured48.8%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMCANot measured4.5%Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena TextNot measured1334Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1299Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1331Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1349Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1318Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1370Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1335Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1334Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1317Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1307Only Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1297Only Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Command R7B (12-2024) and Gemma 3 12B
BenchmarkCommand R7B (12-2024)Gemma 3 12BLeader
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)$0.0001Fits in one request
Gemma 3 12B$0.0002Fits 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 3 12B$0.0042Fits in one request

Command R7B (12-2024) costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Command R7B (12-2024)$0.0090Exceeds the context window
Gemma 3 12B$0.017Exceeds 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 3 12B
SpecificationCohere Command R7B (12-2024)Google Gemma 3 12B
MakerCohereGoogle
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 14, 2024March 13, 2025
Context window128K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.0375$0.075
Output $/Mtok$0.15$0.1625
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 3 12B 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 1.1x cheaper ($0.15 vs $0.1625 per million).

Which is cheaper, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 3 12B?

Command R7B (12-2024) costs $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Gemma 3 12B costs $0.075 and $0.1625. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Command R7B (12-2024) or Gemma 3 12B?

Gemma 3 12B, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Command R7B (12-2024) vs Gemma 3 12B 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 Gemma 3 12B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next