Command R vs Gemma 2 2B IT vs Saba
Command R comes out ahead, 31 to 21 and 0 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
CohereCommand R
31/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.60
- Context128K
GoogleGemma 2 2B IT
0/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context8K
Mistral AISaba
21/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.60
- Context33K
Command R is our pick
Command R is the better all-round choice, scoring 31/100 against Saba (21) and Gemma 2 2B IT (0). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceCommand RCommand R $0.263 · Saba $0.30 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Gemma 2 2B IT unpriced
- Longest contextCommand RCommand R 128,000 · Saba 32,768 · Gemma 2 2B IT 8,192 tokens
- Widest inputsSabaCommand R: Text · Gemma 2 2B IT: Text · Saba: Text, PDFs
- Self-hostingCommand R and Gemma 2 2B ITPublishes downloadable weights (Gemma Terms of Use)
| Measure | Weight | Command R | Gemma 2 2B IT | Saba |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 35 | 0 | 35 |
| Context window | 40% | 24 | 0 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 31/100 | 0/100 | 21/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Command RCohere | Gemma 2 2B ITGoogle | SabaMistral AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.15 (best) | — | $0.20 |
| Output | $0.60 | — | $0.60 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.263 (best) | — | $0.30 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Cohere API | — | Median of 4 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens |
| Max output | 4,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 26,214 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | Yes |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | OpenGemma Terms of Use | Proprietary |
| API model ID | command-r-08-2024 | — | — |
| API providers | 6 (best) | — | 4 |
| Released | Aug 30, 2024 | Jul 31, 2024 | Feb 17, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 1, 2024 | — | Sep 30, 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Command R$2.70
- Gemma 2 2B IT—
- Saba$3.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Command R, Gemma 2 2B IT or Saba?
Command R is the better all-round choice, scoring 31/100 against Saba (21) and Gemma 2 2B IT (0). It leads on context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Command R, Gemma 2 2B IT or Saba?
Command R is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). Saba costs $0.20 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.263 per million tokens for Command R versus $0.30 for Saba (1.1× as much). Gemma 2 2B IT has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command R has not been scored yet, Gemma 2 2B IT has not been scored yet and Saba has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command R, Gemma 2 2B IT and Saba yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Gemma 2 2B IT does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Command R has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 32,768 for Saba and 8,192 for Gemma 2 2B IT. Maximum output per response: Command R up to 4,000, Gemma 2 2B IT up to 8,192, Saba up to 26,214 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Command R accepts text; Gemma 2 2B IT accepts text; Saba accepts text and PDFs. Saba handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Command R and Gemma 2 2B IT publishes its weights (Gemma Terms of Use) and can be self-hosted; Saba is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Saba is the newest, released Feb 17, 2025. Command R came out Aug 30, 2024; Gemma 2 2B IT came out Jul 31, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Command R Jun 1, 2024, Saba Sep 30, 2024.
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 Nov 2, 2026.
