ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

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

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. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.197 / $0.51
    • Context128K
  2. Upstage

    solar-mini

    Released Jun 12, 2024

    52/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.15
    • 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 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 contextLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Command RLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct 128,000 · Command R 128,000 · solar-mini 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct: Text, Images · solar-mini: Text · Command R: Text
  • Self-hostingLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Command RPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instructsolar-miniCommand R
Price50%768977
Inputs & features30%502525
Context window20%24024
Overall100%58/10052/10051/100

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 solar-mini vs Command R specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMetasolar-miniUpstageCommand RCohere
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.197$0.15 (best)$0.15 (best)
Output$0.51$0.15 (best)$0.60
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$0.275$0.15 (best)$0.263
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersOfficial Upstage APIOfficial Cohere API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens (best)32,768 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Max output4,096 tokens (best)4,096 tokens (best)4,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoNoNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model ID—solar-minicommand-r-08-2024
API providers215 (best)
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Jun 12, 2024Aug 30, 2024
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023Sep 2024Jun 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
  • solar-mini$1.80
  • Command R$2.70
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

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, Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct, solar-mini or Command R?

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. Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct has not been scored yet, solar-mini has not been scored yet 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, solar-mini and Command R 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?

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

Are any of these open source?

Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct and Command R 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: Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-Instruct Dec 2023, solar-mini Sep 2024, 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.