ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B vs Command R

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct comes out ahead, 58 to 51 and 49 on our weighted score, though Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is 2.8× cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B

    Released Nov 12, 2024

    49/100
    • ECI88.2
    • Price$0.10 / $0.10
    • Context33K
  3. Cohere

    Command R

    Released Aug 30, 2024

    51/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.60
    • 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 Command R (51) and Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B (49). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B 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 priceQwen2.5-Coder-0.5BQwen2.5-Coder-0.5B $0.10 · Command R $0.263 · Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct $0.275 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Command RLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · Command R 128,000 · Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B: Text · Command R: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructQwen2.5-Coder-0.5BCommand R
Price50%769777
Inputs & features30%50025
Context window20%24024
Overall100%58/10049/10051/100

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.

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct vs Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B vs Command R specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetaQwen2.5-Coder-0.5BAlibaba (Qwen)Command RCohere
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—88.2—
ECI rank—#148 of 148—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.197$0.10 (best)$0.15
Output$0.51$0.10 (best)$0.60
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.275$0.10 (best)$0.263
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 1 providersOfficial Cohere API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Max output4,096 tokens8,192 tokens (best)4,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache 2.0Open
API model ID——command-r-08-2024
API providers215 (best)
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Nov 12, 2024Aug 30, 2024
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023—Jun 1, 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.

  • Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct$2.99
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B$1.20
  • Command R$2.70
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B or Command R?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Command R (51) and Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B (49). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B 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, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B or Command R?

Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.10 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). 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 $0.10 per million tokens for Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B versus $0.263 for Command R (2.6× as much) and $0.275 for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct (2.8× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B has an ECI of 88.2 and Command R has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B and Command R yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Command R have the largest context windows (128,000 and 128,000 tokens), against 32,768 for Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct up to 4,096, Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B up to 8,192, Command R up to 4,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct accepts text and images; Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B accepts text; Command R accepts text. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen2.5-Coder-0.5B is the newest, released Nov 12, 2024. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct came out Sep 25, 2024; Command R came out Aug 30, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023, Command R 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.