Command R7B (12-2024) vs Grok Build 0.1
Command R7B (12-2024) costs 13.3x less per output token than Grok Build 0.1 ($0.15 vs $2.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.15
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $2.00
Command R7B (12-2024) or Grok Build 0.1: 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 13.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $2.00 per million).
No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R7B (12-2024) has results on Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL); Grok Build 0.1 on AA Coding Index, Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and AA Intelligence 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.
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 Grok Build 0.1 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 27.2.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Grok Build 0.1
Grok Build 0.1 takes 256K tokens against 128K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Command R7B (12-2024)
Command R7B (12-2024) $0.0001, Grok Build 0.1 $0.0020 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Command R7B (12-2024) not benchmarked, Grok Build 0.1 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 Grok Build 0.1 $2.00 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
- Context window
- Command R7B (12-2024) takes 128K tokens, Grok Build 0.1 256K.
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
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Grok Build 0.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 51.5 | Only Grok Build 0.1 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 13.4% | Only Grok Build 0.1 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
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Grok Build 0.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | Not measured | 27.2 | Only Grok Build 0.1 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
| Benchmark | Command R7B (12-2024) | Grok Build 0.1 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 32.1% | Not measured | Only Command R7B (12-2024) measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 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) | SpaceXAI Grok Build 0.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Cohere | xAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | December 14, 2024 | May 20, 2026 |
| Context window | 128K | 256K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.0375 | $1.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.15 | $2.00 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Command R7B (12-2024) better than Grok Build 0.1 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 13.3x cheaper ($0.15 vs $2.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Command R7B (12-2024) or Grok Build 0.1?
Command R7B (12-2024) costs $0.0375 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Grok Build 0.1 costs $1.00 and $2.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Command R7B (12-2024) or Grok Build 0.1?
Grok Build 0.1, with 256K tokens against 128K.
Has any benchmark tested both Command R7B (12-2024) and Grok Build 0.1?
No benchmark has tested both yet. Command R7B (12-2024) has results on Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL); Grok Build 0.1 on AA Coding Index, Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) and AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.