Command R7B vs Qwen-MT Plus vs Sonar Deep Research
Command R7B comes out ahead, 62 to 20 and 12 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
CohereCommand R7B
62/100- ECI—
- Price$0.037 / $0.15
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-MT Plus
12/100- ECI—
- Price$2.46 / $7.37
- Context16K
PerplexitySonar Deep Research
20/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $8.00
- Context128K
Command R7B is our pick
Command R7B is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Sonar Deep Research (20) and Qwen-MT Plus (12). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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 R7BCommand R7B $0.066 · Sonar Deep Research $3.50 · Qwen-MT Plus $3.69 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextCommand R7B and Sonar Deep ResearchCommand R7B 128,000 · Sonar Deep Research 128,000 · Qwen-MT Plus 16,384 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsCommand R7B: Text · Qwen-MT Plus: Text · Sonar Deep Research: Text
- Self-hostingCommand R7BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Command R7B | Qwen-MT Plus | Sonar Deep Research |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 23 | 24 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 0 | 10 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 62/100 | 12/100 | 20/100 |
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 R7BCohere | Qwen-MT PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.037 (best) | $2.46 | $2.00 |
| Output | $0.15 (best) | $7.37 | $8.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.066 (best) | $3.69 | $3.50 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Cohere API | Official Alibaba API | Official Perplexity API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 4,000 tokens | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yesminimal · low · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | command-r7b-12-2024 | qwen-mt-plus | sonar-deep-research |
| API providers | 5 (best) | 1 | 3 |
| Released | Dec 2, 2024 | Jan 2025 | Feb 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 1, 2024 | Apr 2024 | Jan 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 R7B$0.675
- Qwen-MT Plus$39.34
- Sonar Deep Research$36.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Command R7B, Qwen-MT Plus or Sonar Deep Research?
Command R7B is the better all-round choice, scoring 62/100 against Sonar Deep Research (20) and Qwen-MT Plus (12). It leads on price and inputs & features. 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, Qwen-MT Plus or Sonar Deep Research?
Command R7B is cheaper at $0.037 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price). Sonar Deep Research costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official Perplexity API price); Qwen-MT Plus costs $2.46 input / $7.37 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 versus $3.50 for Sonar Deep Research (53× as much) and $3.69 for Qwen-MT Plus (56× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Command R7B has not been scored yet, Qwen-MT Plus has not been scored yet and Sonar Deep Research has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Command R7B, Qwen-MT Plus and Sonar Deep Research yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-MT Plus and Sonar Deep Research does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Command R7B and Sonar Deep Research have the largest context windows (128,000 and 128,000 tokens), against 16,384 for Qwen-MT Plus. Maximum output per response: Command R7B up to 4,000, Qwen-MT Plus up to 8,192, Sonar Deep Research up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Command R7B accepts text; Qwen-MT Plus accepts text; Sonar Deep Research accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Command R7B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen-MT Plus and Sonar Deep Research is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Sonar Deep Research is the newest, released Feb 1, 2025. Qwen-MT Plus came out Jan 2025; Command R7B came out Dec 2, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Command R7B Jun 1, 2024, Qwen-MT Plus Apr 2024, Sonar Deep Research Jan 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.
