Command A+ released
Cohere · Model release
Source confirmed
Data as of September 30, 2026 · How the score is built
CurrentOpen WeightReasoning
Released May 20, 2026128K context
Command A+
Decision readingCommand A+ scores 36.6 out of 100 and ranks #143 of 211. This profile shows 5 source-displayable benchmark rows; its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #48. API pricing is $2.5 input and $10 output per million tokens.
Released May 20, 2026 — see all recent releases
Command A+ will be repriced, updated or retired. Get each notice with its source and date. Follow model changes
Share or export
Decision snapshot
Each value carries a field reference instead of floating alone. Markers compare this model with the current ranked and priced catalog; they are not absolute quality thresholds.
Capability
36.6/100
field median 52.4#143 of 211 ranked models
Public
#143of 211
Verified —
Price
$2.50input / $10 output
input median $1blended $6.25
Speed
215tok/s
field median 89 tok/sFirst token 9.83 s
Context
128Ktokens
field median 256,000Reported for this model; direct source link not stored
Strongest published evidence
Multimodal & Grounded ranks #48. Particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Validate before choosing
5 published rows leave some tracked benchmark slots empty. Agentic is its lowest eligible category at #102.
Source-linked · 5 displayable benchmark rows
Follow model changesCategory score record
Scores and ranks appear only where published evidence can be displayed. The table keeps the score, weight, cohort, and evidence state together.
| Category | Score | Rank | Percentile | Weight | Benchmarks | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AgenticRank #102 of 119Percentile 14thWeight 22%2 benchmarksVerified | 15.9 | 2 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| CodingWeight 20%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| ReasoningWeight 17%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultimodalRank #48 of 49Percentile 2ndWeight 12%3 benchmarksVerified | 16.1 | 3 benchmarks | Verified | |||
| KnowledgeWeight 12%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MultilingualWeight 7%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| Inst. FollowingWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured | |||
| MathWeight 5%0 benchmarksNot measured | Not measured | 0 benchmarks | Not measured |
5 of 495 tracked benchmark slots have displayable evidence · bars run 0–100
Coverage detailsHow much of this is verified
Coverage is split by category so a strong number never hides a thin evidence base. Verified means the row is tied to a published source; provisional rows remain visible but separate.
- Agentic2/2 verified
- CodingNot measured
- ReasoningNot measured
- Multimodal3/3 verified
- KnowledgeNot measured
- MultilingualNot measured
- Inst. FollowingNot measured
- MathNot measured
Verified sourceProvisionalNot measured
Capability shape
Each axis shows percentile within that category’s eligible cohort. The comparison outline is the median of the six nearest public-score peers; a collapsed vertex means the category is not rank-eligible.
Command A+ category percentile values
- Agentic14th percentile
- CodingNot eligible
- ReasoningNot eligible
- Multimodal2nd percentile
- KnowledgeNot eligible
- MultilingualNot eligible
- Instruction followingNot eligible
- MathNot eligible
The dashed outline is median of 6 nearest peers.
Eligible category ranks
- Agentic#102/119
- CodingNot ranked
- ReasoningNot ranked
- Multimodal#48/49
- KnowledgeNot ranked
- MultilingualNot ranked
- Inst. FollowingNot ranked
- MathNot ranked
Top decileTop quartileMid-fieldNot eligible
Benchmark ledger
Agentic opens by default. The marker compares each value with the best source-verified result in the catalog; provisional leaders do not set the reference. Expand the remaining categories for every published row.
Agentic2 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Terminal-Bench 2.1, Vals AI run | Score17.6% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-6 Astra · 87.3% | Gap69.7 behind | Weight3% ref. weight | |
| τ²-bench resultsτ²-Bench Tool-Agent-User Evaluation | Score85% | Versus best verified row Best verified: GPT-5.4 · 98.9% | Gap13.9 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Multimodal3 rows
| Benchmark | Score | Versus best verified row | Gap | Weight | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro | Score63% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Gemini 3.5 Flash · 83.6% | Gap20.6 behind | WeightWeighted 40% | Provider exact |
| CharXivCharXiv Reasoning | Score52.7% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.8 Max · 93.5% | Gap40.8 behind | WeightWeighted 20% | Provider exact |
| MMMUMassive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding | Score75.1% | Versus best verified row Best verified: Qwen3.6-27B · 82.9% | Gap7.8 behind | WeightDisplay only | Provider exact |
Bars run 0–100; the dark tick marks the best source-verified value
All 5 rowsWhat it costs to get this score
Published API price against the public score. The x-axis uses a log scale; the dashed path marks models that are not beaten by a cheaper, higher-scoring option. Price uses average of published input and output rates.
Current modelExplore all models
Command A+ · 36.6 score · $6.25 blended per million tokens
The chart opens on the current model. Scroll horizontally to inspect the full price axis.
Horizontal: blended price per million tokens, log scale · Vertical: public score
Lineage
The sequence follows explicit supersedes links. Each score is estimated for that model; a relative can inform a sparse estimate but never sets a floor, so a newer release can score below an earlier one. Scores and prices remain blank when the corresponding public row or first-party rate is unavailable.
Plus
Radar
Full release historyCommand A+ release history
Radar confirmed these at the source. Use Command A+ in your work? Explore Radar to follow supported changes and choose your alerts.
Radar
Spec sheet
Each documented value carries its source. Missing fields stay visible as not sourced or not published, rather than disappearing from the page.
- API model ID
- Not published
- Context window
- 128K
- Maximum output
- Not sourced yet
- Knowledge cutoff
- Not sourced yet
- Input modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Output modalities
- Not sourced yet
- Parameters
- Not sourced yet
- Availability
- Not sourced yet
- Cloud regions
- Not tracked yet
- Lifecycle
- Current
- API capabilities
- Tool calling, structured outputs, and batch support are not tracked yet
- Prompt caching
- Not documented in the pricing record
- Self-host
- Open weights available; hardware estimate not sourced
- Rate limits
- Not tracked yet
How to read this profile
The visual layer above carries the decisions. These notes preserve the model, ranking, coverage, and family context behind the numbers.
Command A+ ranks #143 of 211 on the public leaderboard with a score of 36.6/100. It does not yet have enough sourced coverage for a verified position.
Command A+ is a open weight model with a 128K context window. It uses an explicit reasoning mode, which can improve complex problem solving while adding latency and token use.
5 of 495 tracked benchmark slots currently have displayable evidence. Missing categories stay blank.
Its strongest eligible category is Multimodal & Grounded at #48, while its lowest eligible position is Agentic at #102. particularly strong for screenshots, documents, charts, and grounded multimodal workflows.
Last updated September 30, 2026. Runtime fields remain blank until a sourced snapshot exists.
Deployment options
Self-host and provider-specific paths stay separate from benchmark evidence so operating constraints are visible before a score becomes the whole decision.
Published weights are available, but BenchLM does not yet have a sourced parameter and VRAM profile for this exact model. Hardware cost estimates stay unavailable until that sizing record is complete.
Estimate VRAM from known parametersQuestions
How does Command A+ perform overall in AI benchmarks?
Command A+ ranks #143 out of 211 models on the public BenchAlign leaderboard, with a score of 36.6/100. Its evidence status is Estimated, and this profile shows 5 source-displayable benchmark rows. The label describes evidence depth, not a provider quality claim; inspect category rows before choosing a workload.
Is Command A+ good for agentic tool use and computer tasks?
Command A+ ranks #102 out of 119 eligible models for agentic tool use and computer tasks, with a public category score of 15.9/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Command A+ good for multimodal and grounded tasks?
Command A+ ranks #48 out of 49 eligible models for multimodal and grounded tasks, with a public category score of 16.1/100. Higher-ranked alternatives are available for workloads where this category decides the choice. Check the underlying rows before treating the aggregate as a workload guarantee.
Is Command A+ open source?
Command A+ is an open-weight model from Cohere. Its weights can be downloaded for local or hosted deployment, subject to the published license. Open weight does not automatically mean open source: training data and training code may remain private, and commercial restrictions can still apply.
Does Command A+ have full benchmark coverage on BenchLM?
No. Command A+ currently has 20 source-displayable rows across 495 tracked benchmark slots. The profile exposes published, non-generated evidence and leaves missing categories blank until an exact evaluation is available. Coverage describes how much was measured; it is not a penalty added to an individual benchmark result.
What is the context window size of Command A+?
Command A+ has a reported context window of 128K in the exact-model catalog record. The value stays visible, but the profile marks its source link as unavailable instead of presenting it as directly documented. Maximum output length remains separate because providers often publish a different limit.