ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Command R vs solar-mini vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 58 to 52 and 51 on our weighted score, though solar-mini is 45% cheaper per token.

  1. Cohere

    Command R

    Released Aug 30, 2024

    51/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • Context128K
  2. Upstage

    solar-mini

    Released Jun 12, 2024

    52/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.15
    • Context33K
  3. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
01 — Verdict

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is our pick

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against solar-mini (52) and Command R (51). It leads on inputs & features. solar-mini wins on price. 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 pricesolar-minisolar-mini $0.15 · Command R $0.263 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.275 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextCommand R and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructCommand R 128,000 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · solar-mini 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructCommand R: Text · solar-mini: Text · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingCommand R and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightCommand Rsolar-miniLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct
Price50%778976
Inputs & features30%252550
Context window20%24024
Overall100%51/10052/10058/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Command R vs solar-mini vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationCommand RCoheresolar-miniUpstageLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.15 (best)$0.15 (best)$0.197
Output$0.60$0.15 (best)$0.51
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.263$0.15 (best)$0.275
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Cohere APIOfficial Upstage APIMedian of 2 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Max output4,000 tokens4,096 tokens (best)4,096 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDcommand-r-08-2024solar-mini—
API providers5 (best)12
ReleasedAug 30, 2024Jun 12, 2024Sep 25, 2024
Knowledge cutoffJun 1, 2024Sep 2024Dec 2023
03 — Cost

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
  • solar-mini$1.80
  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Command R, solar-mini or Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against solar-mini (52) and Command R (51). It leads on inputs & features. solar-mini wins on price. 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 R, solar-mini or Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct?

solar-mini is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). Command R costs $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price); Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct costs $0.197 input / $0.51 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for solar-mini versus $0.263 for Command R (1.8× as much) and $0.275 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct (1.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command R has not been scored yet, solar-mini has not been scored yet and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command R, solar-mini and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Command R and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct have the largest context windows (128,000 and 128,000 tokens), against 32,768 for solar-mini. Maximum output per response: Command R up to 4,000, solar-mini up to 4,096, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Command R accepts text; solar-mini accepts text; Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Command R and Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; solar-mini is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the newest, released Sep 25, 2024. Command R came out Aug 30, 2024; solar-mini came out Jun 12, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Command R Jun 1, 2024, solar-mini Sep 2024, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023.

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.