Command A vs Qwen 2.5 72B

Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.

Qwen 2.5 72B by Qwen wins on 11 of 15 benchmarks against Command A by Cohere, which leads on 4. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from our benchmark data.

Category-by-Category Breakdown

General Intelligence: In general intelligence, Command A scores 1250 on Chatbot Arena ELO compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 1230, while Qwen 2.5 72B scores 72.0% on MMLU-Pro compared to Command A's 68.0%.

Coding: In coding, Qwen 2.5 72B scores 80.0% on HumanEval+ compared to Command A's 78.0%, while Command A scores 32.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 28.0%, while Qwen 2.5 72B scores 55.5% on LiveCodeBench compared to Command A's 35.0%.

Math: In math, Qwen 2.5 72B scores 83.1% on MATH compared to Command A's 72.0%, while Qwen 2.5 72B scores 91.0% on GSM8K compared to Command A's 88.0%.

Reasoning: In reasoning, Qwen 2.5 72B scores 49.1% on GPQA Diamond compared to Command A's 45.0%, while Command A scores 15.0% on ARC-AGI compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 12.0%.

Context: In context, Command A scores 256K on Context Length compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 33K, while Qwen 2.5 72B scores 85.9% on RULER compared to Command A's 76.5%.

Pricing Comparison

Command A costs $2.5/1M input tokens and $10.0/1M output tokens, while Qwen 2.5 72B costs $0.36/1M input and $0.40/1M output. Qwen 2.5 72B is the more affordable option for API usage.

Speed Comparison

Command A generates output at 70 tok/s compared to Qwen 2.5 72B's 80 tok/s, and the time to first token is 400 ms for Command A versus 350 ms for Qwen 2.5 72B. Qwen 2.5 72B delivers faster throughput.

Verdict

For developers prioritizing coding and general intelligence, Command A has the edge. For those who value math and affordability and speed, Qwen 2.5 72B is the stronger choice.

View Individual Model Pages

Command A vs Qwen 2.5 72B — FAQ

Which is better, Command A or Qwen 2.5 72B?

Qwen 2.5 72B wins on more benchmarks overall (11 vs 4). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.

How does Command A compare to Qwen 2.5 72B for coding?

Command A is better for coding, scoring 32.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 28.0%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.

Is Command A cheaper than Qwen 2.5 72B?

Yes, Qwen 2.5 72B is cheaper. Command A costs $2.5/1M input and $10.0/1M output tokens. Qwen 2.5 72B costs $0.36/1M input and $0.40/1M output tokens.

Which is faster, Command A or Qwen 2.5 72B?

Qwen 2.5 72B is faster, generating output at 80 tok/s compared to 70 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.

What benchmarks does the Command A vs Qwen 2.5 72B comparison cover?

This comparison covers 15 benchmarks including Chatbot Arena ELO, MMLU-Pro, HumanEval+, MATH, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, Output Speed, LiveCodeBench, and more. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.