Command R7B (12-2024) vs GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
| Signal | Command R7B (12-2024) | Delta | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 33 | -17 | |
Benchmarks | 38 | +38 | |
Pricing | 100 | +4 | |
Context window size | 81 | +14 | |
Recency | 7 | +7 | |
Output Capacity | 58 | 0 | |
| Overall Result | 4 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
Score History
35.8
current score
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
right now
40
current score
Command R7B (12-2024)
Cohere
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
OpenAI
Command R7B (12-2024) saves you $488.75/month
That's $5865.00/year compared to GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Command R7B (12-2024) | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 36 | 40 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
| Rank | #417 | #415 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
| Quality Rank | #417 | #415 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
| Adoption Rank | #417 | #415 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
| Parameters | 7B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 128K | 16K | Command R7B (12-2024) |
| Pricing | $0.04/$0.15/M | $3.00/$4.00/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 33 | 50 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
| Benchmarks | 38 | -- | Command R7B (12-2024) |
| Pricing | 100 | 96 | Command R7B (12-2024) |
| Context window size | 81 | 67 | Command R7B (12-2024) |
| Recency | 7 | 0 | Command R7B (12-2024) |
| Output Capacity | 58 | 58 | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 36/100 (rank #417), placing it in the top -43% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #415), placing it in the top -43% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 4-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Choose Command R7B (12-2024) when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
- Processing long documents or large codebases (128K token context)
Choose GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k when you need:
- Agentic applications using tool/function calling
Command R7B (12-2024) offers 97% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $2.81/month with Command R7B (12-2024) vs $105.00/month with GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k - a $102.19 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Command R7B (12-2024) also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (128K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.15/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k has a moderate advantage with a 4.200000000000003-point lead in composite score. It wins on more signal dimensions, but Command R7B (12-2024) has specific strengths that could make it the better choice for certain workflows.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Command R7B (12-2024)
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Command R7B (12-2024)
97% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Command R7B (12-2024)
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Command R7B (12-2024)
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Command R7B (12-2024)
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Cohere
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Cost - 97% lower pricing; better value at scale
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
| Capability | Command R7B (12-2024) | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Command R7B (12-2024)
Cohere
GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k
OpenAI
Command R7B (12-2024) saves you $9.95/month
That's 98% cheaper than GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Command R7B (12-2024) | GPT-3.5 Turbo 16k |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 128K | 16K |
| Max Output Tokens | 4,000 | 4,096 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Dec 14, 2024 | Aug 28, 2023 |