Command A Plus vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Too close to call on our weighted score (Command A Plus 35, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34). The right pick depends on what you value most.
CohereCommand A Plus
35/100- ECI—
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
34/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context262K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Command A Plus 35/100, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on price and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceQwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen3.8 2.4T A95B $3.00 · Command A Plus $4.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.8 2.4T A95BQwen3.8 2.4T A95B 262,144 · Command A Plus 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsCommand A PlusCommand A Plus: Text, Images · Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Command A Plus | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 19 | 27 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 35/100 | 34/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Command A PlusCohere | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.50 | $2.00 (best) |
| Output | $10.00 | $6.00 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.38 | $3.00 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Cohere API | Median of 21 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 64,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Openqwen3.8-max |
| API model ID | command-a-plus-05-2026 | — |
| API providers | 1 | 21 (best) |
| Released | May 20, 2026 | Aug 12, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 1, 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Command A Plus$45.00
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$32.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Command A Plus or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Command A Plus 35/100, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B 34/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B on price and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Command A Plus or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 21 API providers). Command A Plus costs $2.50 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.00 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B versus $4.38 for Command A Plus (1.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Command A Plus has not been scored yet and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command A Plus and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 128,000 for Command A Plus. Maximum output per response: Command A Plus up to 64,000, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Command A Plus accepts text and images; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B accepts text. Command A Plus handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights (qwen3.8-max), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is the newest, released Aug 12, 2026. Command A Plus came out May 20, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Command A Plus Apr 1, 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedThree-way comparison
- Command A Plus vs Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI
- Command A Plus vs GPT-5.3 Codex SparkOpenAI
- Command A Plus vs ParetoUnbiased
- Command A Plus vs Qwen3.8 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen)
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K2.7 Code HighspeedMoonshot AI
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs ParetoUnbiased
