+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs Command R+
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads with 20.2% higher average benchmark score. Claude 3.5 Sonnet offers 144.0K more tokens in context window than Command R+. Command R+ is $16.75 cheaper per million tokens. Claude 3.5 Sonnet supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Claude 3.5 Sonnet is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Anthropic
This upgraded version of Claude 3.5 Sonnet was released with significant improvements in coding and agentic tool use. Built to deliver enhanced performance in software engineering tasks, it brought substantial gains in reasoning and problem-solving while introducing the groundbreaking computer use capability in public beta, allowing it to interact with computer interfaces like a human.
+
+
+
+
Cohere
Command R+ was developed by Cohere as an advanced language model designed for enterprise applications requiring retrieval-augmented generation. Built to excel at combining external knowledge with language understanding, it serves businesses needing reliable, factually-grounded AI assistance with strong reasoning and multilingual capabilities.
1 month newer
Command R+
Cohere
2024-08-30
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Anthropic
2024-10-22
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Input:$3.00
Output:$15.00
+
+
+
+
Command R+
Input:$0.25
Output:$1.00($16.75 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 2 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Average Score:93.4%(+20.2%)
+
+
+
+
Command R+
Average Score:73.2%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
3 providers
Anthropic
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Bedrock
Throughput: 101 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Throughput: 42 tok/s
Latency: 0.4ms
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Claude 3.5 Sonnet
Avg Score:93.4%(+20.2%)
Providers:3
+
+
+
+
Command R+
Avg Score:73.2%
Providers:2