Vision Medium vs Qwen Max vs Command R+
Vision Medium comes out ahead, 48 to 25 and 24 on our weighted score, though Qwen Max is 2.3× cheaper per token.
- Our pick
VisparkVision Medium
48/100- ECI—
- Price$4.21 / $12.63
- Context1M
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Max
24/100- ECI—
- Price$1.60 / $6.40
- Context33K
CohereCommand R+
25/100- ECI—
- Price$2.50 / $10.00
- Context128K
Vision Medium is our pick
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 48/100 against Command R+ (25) and Qwen Max (24). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen Max 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 priceQwen MaxQwen Max $2.80 · Command R+ $4.38 · Vision Medium $6.32 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextVision MediumVision Medium 1,000,000 · Command R+ 128,000 · Qwen Max 32,768 tokens
- Widest inputsVision MediumVision Medium: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen Max: Text · Command R+: Text
- Self-hostingCommand R+Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Vision Medium | Qwen Max | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 11 | 27 | 19 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 100 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 0 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 48/100 | 24/100 | 25/100 |
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 | Vision MediumVispark | Qwen MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | Command R+Cohere |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $4.21 | $1.60 (best) | $2.50 |
| Output | $12.63 | $6.40 (best) | $10.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.32 | $2.80 (best) | $4.38 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Vispark API | Official Alibaba API | Official Cohere API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 65,536 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 4,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | Yes | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | vispark/vision-medium | qwen-max | command-r-plus-08-2024 |
| API providers | 1 | 8 (best) | 8 (best) |
| Released | May 15, 2024 | Apr 3, 2024 | Aug 30, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 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.
- Vision Medium$67.36
- Qwen Max$28.80
- Command R+$45.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Vision Medium, Qwen Max or Command R+?
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 48/100 against Command R+ (25) and Qwen Max (24). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Qwen Max 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, Vision Medium, Qwen Max or Command R+?
Qwen Max is cheaper at $1.60 input / $6.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Command R+ costs $2.50 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Cohere API price); Vision Medium costs $4.21 input / $12.63 output per million tokens (official Vispark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.80 per million tokens for Qwen Max versus $4.38 for Command R+ (1.6× as much) and $6.32 for Vision Medium (2.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Vision Medium has not been scored yet, Qwen Max 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 Vision Medium, Qwen Max 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?
Vision Medium has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Command R+ and 32,768 for Qwen Max. Maximum output per response: Vision Medium up to 65,536, Qwen Max up to 8,192, Command R+ up to 4,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Vision Medium accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen Max accepts text; Command R+ accepts text. Vision Medium handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Command R+ publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Vision Medium and Qwen Max is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Command R+ is the newest, released Aug 30, 2024. Vision Medium came out May 15, 2024; Qwen Max came out Apr 3, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen Max Apr 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 Nov 2, 2026.
