GPT-5 Chat vs Command A Vision
GPT-5 Chat comes out ahead, 34 to 22 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
OpenAIGPT-5 Chat
34/100- ECI—
- Price$1.25 / $10.00
- Context400K
CohereCommand A Vision
22/100- ECI—
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
GPT-5 Chat is our pick
GPT-5 Chat is the better all-round choice, scoring 34/100 against Command A Vision (22). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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 priceGPT-5 ChatGPT-5 Chat $3.44 · Command A Vision $4.38 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGPT-5 ChatGPT-5 Chat 400,000 · Command A Vision 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGPT-5 Chat: Text, Images · Command A Vision: Text, Images
- Self-hostingCommand A VisionPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5 Chat | Command A Vision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 24 | 19 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 45 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 44 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 34/100 | 22/100 |
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 | GPT-5 ChatOpenAI | Command A VisionCohere |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $1.25 (best) | $2.50 |
| Output | $10.00 | $10.00 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.44 (best) | $4.38 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 2 providers | Official Cohere API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 8,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | No | No |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | command-a-vision-07-2025 |
| API providers | 2 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Aug 7, 2025 | Jul 31, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 30, 2024 | Jun 1, 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-5 Chat$32.50
- Command A Vision$45.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5 Chat or Command A Vision?
GPT-5 Chat is the better all-round choice, scoring 34/100 against Command A Vision (22). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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, GPT-5 Chat or Command A Vision?
GPT-5 Chat is cheaper at $1.25 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Command A Vision 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 $3.44 per million tokens for GPT-5 Chat versus $4.38 for Command A Vision (1.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. GPT-5 Chat has not been scored yet and Command A Vision has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5 Chat and Command A Vision yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that GPT-5 Chat and Command A Vision does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5 Chat has the largest context window at 400,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Command A Vision. Maximum output per response: GPT-5 Chat up to 128,000, Command A Vision up to 8,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5 Chat accepts text and images; Command A Vision accepts text and images. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Command A Vision publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GPT-5 Chat is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GPT-5 Chat is the newest, released Aug 7, 2025. Command A Vision came out Jul 31, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5 Chat Sep 30, 2024, Command A Vision Jun 1, 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Jamba LargeThree-way comparison
- GPT-5 Chat vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
- GPT-5 Chat vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGoogle
- GPT-5 Chat vs Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI
- Command A Vision vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
- Command A Vision vs Gemini 2.5 Computer Use PreviewGoogle
- Command A Vision vs Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI
