Saba vs Solar Pro 2 vs Command R
Too close to call on our weighted score (Command R 52, Solar Pro 2 51, Saba 46). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Mistral AISaba
46/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.60
- Context33K
UpstageSolar Pro 2
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.25
- Context66K
CohereCommand R
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.60
- Context128K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Command R 52/100, Solar Pro 2 51/100, Saba 46/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Solar Pro 2 on price and Command R for long inputs. 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 Pro 2Solar Pro 2 $0.25 · Command R $0.263 · Saba $0.30 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextCommand RCommand R 128,000 · Solar Pro 2 65,536 · Saba 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsSabaSaba: Text, PDFs · Solar Pro 2: Text · Command R: Text
- Self-hostingCommand RPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Saba | Solar Pro 2 | Command R |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 72 | 75 | 74 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 12 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 46/100 | 51/100 | 52/100 |
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 | SabaMistral AI | Solar Pro 2Upstage | Command RCohere |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.20 | $0.25 | $0.15 (best) |
| Output | $0.60 | $0.25 (best) | $0.60 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.30 | $0.25 (best) | $0.263 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 4 providers | Official Upstage API | Official Cohere API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 32,768 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 128,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 26,214 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 4,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yesminimal · high | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | solar-pro2 | command-r-08-2024 |
| API providers | 4 | 2 | 6 (best) |
| Released | Feb 17, 2025 | May 20, 2025 | Aug 30, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 30, 2024 | Mar 2025 | 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.
- Saba$3.20
- Solar Pro 2$3.00
- Command R$2.70
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Saba, Solar Pro 2 or Command R?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Command R 52/100, Solar Pro 2 51/100, Saba 46/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Solar Pro 2 on price and Command R for long inputs. 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, Saba, Solar Pro 2 or Command R?
Solar Pro 2 is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.25 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). Command R costs $0.15 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price); Saba costs $0.20 input / $0.60 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.25 per million tokens for Solar Pro 2 versus $0.263 for Command R (1.1× as much) and $0.30 for Saba (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Saba has not been scored yet, Solar Pro 2 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 Saba, Solar Pro 2 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?
Command R has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 65,536 for Solar Pro 2 and 32,768 for Saba. Maximum output per response: Saba up to 26,214, Solar Pro 2 up to 8,192, Command R up to 4,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Saba accepts text and PDFs; Solar Pro 2 accepts text; Command R accepts text. Saba handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Command R publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Saba and Solar Pro 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Solar Pro 2 is the newest, released May 20, 2025. Saba came out Feb 17, 2025; Command R came out Aug 30, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Saba Sep 30, 2024, Solar Pro 2 Mar 2025, 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 Nov 2, 2026.
