ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Command R7B Arabic vs Qwen-VL OCR vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct comes out ahead, 72 to 65 and 55 on our weighted score, though Command R7B Arabic is 18% cheaper per token.

  1. Cohere

    Command R7B Arabic

    Released Feb 27, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.037 / $0.15
    • Context128K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen-VL OCR

    Released Oct 28, 2024

    55/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.16
    • Context34K
  3. Our pick

    Microsoft

    Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

    Released Feb 26, 2025

    72/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.11
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is our pick

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Command R7B Arabic (65) and Qwen-VL OCR (55). It leads on inputs & features. Command R7B Arabic 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 priceCommand R7B ArabicCommand R7B Arabic $0.066 · Phi-4-multimodal-instruct $0.08 · Qwen-VL OCR $0.092 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextPhi-4-multimodal-instructPhi-4-multimodal-instruct 131,072 · Command R7B Arabic 128,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
  • Widest inputsPhi-4-multimodal-instructCommand R7B Arabic: Text · Qwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · Phi-4-multimodal-instruct: Text, Images, Audio
  • Self-hostingCommand R7B Arabic and Phi-4-multimodal-instructPublishes downloadable weights (MIT)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightCommand R7B ArabicQwen-VL OCRPhi-4-multimodal-instruct
Price50%1009598
Inputs & features30%352560
Context window20%24125
Overall100%65/10055/10072/100

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 R7B Arabic vs Qwen-VL OCR vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationCommand R7B ArabicCohereQwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen)Phi-4-multimodal-instructMicrosoft
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.037 (best)$0.07$0.07
Output$0.15$0.16$0.11 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.066 (best)$0.092$0.08
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Cohere APIOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens34,096 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output4,000 tokens4,096 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoYes
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpenMIT
API model IDcommand-r7b-arabic-02-2025qwen-vl-ocr—
API providers111
ReleasedFeb 27, 2025Oct 28, 2024Feb 26, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJun 1, 2024Apr 2024Jun 2024
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 R7B Arabic$0.675
  • Qwen-VL OCR$1.02
  • Phi-4-multimodal-instruct$0.92
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Command R7B Arabic, Qwen-VL OCR or Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Command R7B Arabic (65) and Qwen-VL OCR (55). It leads on inputs & features. Command R7B Arabic 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 R7B Arabic, Qwen-VL OCR or Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Command R7B Arabic is cheaper at $0.037 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). Phi-4-multimodal-instruct costs $0.07 input / $0.11 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Qwen-VL OCR costs $0.07 input / $0.16 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.066 per million tokens for Command R7B Arabic versus $0.08 for Phi-4-multimodal-instruct (1.2× as much) and $0.092 for Qwen-VL OCR (1.4× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command R7B Arabic has not been scored yet, Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command R7B Arabic, Qwen-VL OCR and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Command R7B Arabic and 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Command R7B Arabic up to 4,000, Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, Phi-4-multimodal-instruct up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Command R7B Arabic accepts text; Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; Phi-4-multimodal-instruct accepts text, images and audio. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Command R7B Arabic and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct publishes its weights (MIT) and can be self-hosted; Qwen-VL OCR is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Command R7B Arabic is the newest, released Feb 27, 2025. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct came out Feb 26, 2025; Qwen-VL OCR came out Oct 28, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Command R7B Arabic Jun 1, 2024, Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, Phi-4-multimodal-instruct Jun 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.