| Signal | Command R (08-2024) | Delta | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -17 | |
Pricing | 1 | -2 | |
Context window size | 81 | -2 | |
Recency | 30 | -49 | |
Output Capacity | 60 | -20 | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 5 | 5 wins |
0
days ranked higher
0
days
30
days ranked higher
Cohere
DeepSeek
Command R (08-2024) saves you $107.50/month
That's $1290.00/year compared to R1 0528 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Command R (08-2024) | R1 0528 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 54 | 75 | R1 0528 |
| Rank | #235 | #93 | R1 0528 |
| Quality Rank | #235 | #93 | R1 0528 |
| Adoption Rank | #235 | #93 | R1 0528 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 164K | R1 0528 |
| Pricing | $0.15/$0.60/M | $0.45/$2.15/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 67 | R1 0528 |
| Pricing | 1 | 2 | R1 0528 |
| Context window size | 81 | 83 | R1 0528 |
| Recency | 30 | 80 | R1 0528 |
| Output Capacity | 60 | 80 | R1 0528 |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 54/100 (rank #235), placing it in the top 19% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 75/100 (rank #93), placing it in the top 68% of all 290 models tracked.
R1 0528 has a 21-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.
Command R (08-2024) offers 71% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $11.25/month with Command R (08-2024) vs $39.00/month with R1 0528 — a $27.75 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Command R (08-2024) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (164K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.60/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (75/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
R1 0528 clearly outperforms Command R (08-2024) with a significant 20.700000000000003-point lead. For most general use cases, R1 0528 is the stronger choice. However, Command R (08-2024) may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
Command R (08-2024)
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Command R (08-2024)
71% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Command R (08-2024)
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Command R (08-2024)
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Command R (08-2024)
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Cohere
| Capability | Command R (08-2024) | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Cohere
DeepSeek
Command R (08-2024) saves you $2.40/month
That's 71% cheaper than R1 0528 at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Command R (08-2024) | R1 0528 |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 164K |
| Max Output Tokens | 4,000 | 65,536 |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Aug 30, 2024 | May 28, 2025 |
R1 0528 scores 75/100 (rank #93) compared to Command R (08-2024)'s 54/100 (rank #235), giving it a 21-point advantage. R1 0528 is the stronger overall choice, though Command R (08-2024) may excel in specific areas like cost efficiency.
Command R (08-2024) is ranked #235 and R1 0528 is ranked #93 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Command R (08-2024) is cheaper at $0.60/M output tokens vs R1 0528's $2.15/M output tokens — 3.6x more expensive. Input token pricing: Command R (08-2024) at $0.15/M vs R1 0528 at $0.45/M.
R1 0528 has a larger context window of 163,840 tokens compared to Command R (08-2024)'s 128,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.